jftLVªh la- Mh- ,y- (,u) 04@0007@2003µ05

REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05

izkf/dkj ls izdkf'kr

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

lkIrkfgd

WEEKLY

la- 37]

ubZ fnYyh, flrEcj 7] 2014—flrEcj 13] 2014] 'kfuokj@Hkkæ 16—Hkkæ 22] 1936

No. 37]

NEW DELHI, SEPTEMBER 7, 2014—SEPTEMBER 13, 2014, SATURDAY/BHADRA 16—BHADRA 22, 1936

Hkkx esa fHkUu i`"B la[;k nh tkrh gS ftlls fd ;g i`Fkd ladyu ds :i esa j[kk tk lds

Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

Hkkx II—[k.M 3—mi&[k.M (ii)

PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)

Hkkjr ljdkj ds ea=kky;ksa (j{kk ea=kky; dks NksM+dj) }kjk tkjh fd, x, lkafof/d vkns'k vkSj vf/lwpuk,a

Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India

(Other than the Ministry of Defence)

3445 GI/2014

(6139)

foÙk ea=kky;

(foÙkh; lsok,a foHkkx)

ubZ fnYYkh] 21 ebZ] 2014

dk-vk- 2433.—dsUnzh; ljdkj] jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh;

iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e

10 ds mi&fu;e (4) ds vuqlj.k esa layXu vuqca/ esa mfYyf[kr

fuEufyf[kr cSadksa dh lwphc¼ 'kk[kkvksa@dk;kZy;ksa dks ftuds 80

ls vf/d deZpkfj;ksa us fgUnh dk dk;Zlk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k

gS] vf/lwfpr djrh gS A

Øe la- cSad ds uke

'kk[kkvksa dh la[;k

1-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

45

2-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj

53

3-

vka/zk cSad

48

4-

bafM;u vksojlht cSad

183

dqy

329

[iQk- la- 11016@13@2013&¯gnh]

MkW- osn izdk'k nwcs] la;qDr funs'kd (jk-Hkk-)

jktHkk"kk fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 (4) ds varxZr

vfèklwfpr fd, tkus okys dk;kZy;ksa@'kk[kkvksa dh lwph

Øekad

'kk[kk dksM

'kk[kk dk uke vkSj irk

(1)

(2)

(3)

1-

11961

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lar ckck Hkwjh okys ds lkeus]

rju rkju jksM] ve`rlj

jkT; % iatkc] fiu % 143006

2-

14651

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

#2320@14] esu cktkj]

cl LVSaM] ve`rlj]

jkT; % iatkc] fiu % 143001

3-

15903

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

54] vkbZ,u,iQ&chMhbZ]

Mªhe ySaM ds lkeus]

xsV ua- lhih&6 [kklk]

ftyk % ve`rlj]

jkT; % iatkc] fiu % 143017

6140

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

4-

16308

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

,lthvkjlh gkfLiVy]

Nijk ¯lg] egrk jksM]

ve`rlj]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 143501

5-

5286

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lh,lh]

Vkmu gky] ve`rlj]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 143001

6-

16142

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

n'kes'k LohV 'kkWi ds lkeus]

dkWyst jksM] xqjnkliqj]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 143521

7-

16421

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

¯lcy pkSd ds ikl]

eequ] iBkudksV]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 145001

8-

14657

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

#219] xka/h uxj]

xqjnkliqj jksM]

iBkudksV]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 145001

9-

5292

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lh , lh] eq[; 'kk[kk Hkou]

<kaxq jksM] iBkudksV]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 145001

10-

15875

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

{ks=kh; O;olk; dk;kZy;]

<kaxq jksM] iBkudksV]

jkT; % iatkc

11-

13515

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

dqjkyh]

ftyk % eksgkyh]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 140103

12-

14630

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

cwFk ua- 51]

lSDVj&40 lh]

paMhx<+

fiu % 160036

13-

14656

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

#1010] lSDVj&68] eksgkyh

ftyk % eksgkyh]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 160071

14-

16309

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

126] fVªC;wu dkWyksuh ds lkFk]

jsyos jksM] cyVkuk]

ftyk % eksgkyh]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 140604

15-

16413

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

paMhx<+ ;wfuo£lVh dSEil]

[kjM+&eks¯jMk jksM] [kjM+]

ftyk % eksgkyh]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 140413

16-

5283

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lh , lh] lSDVj&7 lh]

paMhx<+

fiu % 160007

17-

17022

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

;w vkbZ bZ Vh]

lSDVj&25]

paMhx<+

fiu % 160014

18-

15904

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

fxy ekdsZV Jh csj lkfgc jksM]

lqYrkuiqj yks/h]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 144626

19-

16141

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

okMZ&4] ih,uch pkSd ds ikl]

esu jksM] VkaMk

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 144204

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6141

20-

16144

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

303 Mh&II] csyk pkSd] jksiM+]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 140001

21-

15874

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

{ks=kh; O;olk; dk;kZy;]

HkwfiUnhj Iyktk] lj¯gn jksM]

ifV;kyk]

jkT; % iatkc

22-

1623

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

Ñf"k fodkl 'kk[kk]

xkao % la/kSj]

rglhy % eyjsdksVyk]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148020

23-

1759

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

eq[; 'kk[kk]

ifV;kyk xsV] lax:j]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148001

24-

1762

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

dkWyst jksM]

eysjdksVyk]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148023

25-

2333

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

xkao o Mkd[kkuk % /ukSyk]

ftyk % cjukyk]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148105

26-

3316

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ekuoh] ftyk % lax:j]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148023

27-

3317

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

'ksjksa] ftyk % lax:j]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148106

28-

4200

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

xkao o Mkd[kkuk % /wjh]

ftyk % lax:j]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 140051

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

29-

5575

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ykM~Mk dksBh]

ftyk % lax:j]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148034

30-

5577

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vukt eMh lquke]

ftyk % lax:j]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148028

31-

6341

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

cjukyk]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148101

32-

7400

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

baMfLVª;y ,fj;k] lax:j]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148001

33-

7509

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

xkao o Mkd[kkuk % iQrsgx<+ iatxzkb±

ftyk % lax:j]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148025

34-

7521

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

phek tks/iqj]

ftyk % cjukyk]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148103

35-

11913

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vgenx<+]

ftyk % lax:j]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 141001

36-

11914

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ubZ vukt eaMh] cjukyk]

ftyk % cjukyk]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148101

37-

11915

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

egy dyka]

ftyk % cjukyk]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148101

6142

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

38-

15031

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

yhyk Hkou pkSd] ifV;kyk]

1066@7] xq#}kjs ds ikl]

d'ehfj;ka] f=kijh]

ftyk % ifV;kyk]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 147001

39-

16489

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ubZ vukt eaMh]

Hkokuh x<+]

ftyk % lax:j]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 148026

40-

16508

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

,jkor 'kkW¯ix dkWEIysDl]

ifV;kyk dSaV]

ftyk % ifV;kyk]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 147001

41-

16198

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vkj-th-,u-;w- vkWiQ ykW fl/qoky]

Hkknlku jksM] fl/qoky]

ftyk % ifV;kyk]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 147001

42-

16199

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

flVh czkap] eaMh xks¯cnx<+]

iksLV vkWfiQl jksM]

eaMh xks¯cnx<+]

ftyk % iQrsgx<+ lkfgc]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 147301

43-

5179

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

rukoxzLr vkfLr iquZokl 'kk[kk

lsDVj&7lh]

paMhx<+]

fiu % 160007

44-

5272

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

rukoxzLr vkfLr iquZokl 'kk[kk

fo- ok- 'kk[kk] igyk ry]

,llhvks&5] jathr ,osU;w]

ve`rlj]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 143001

45-

16901

,y th 'kks:e ds lkFk

gsedqaM isVªksy iEi ds lkeus

lj¯gn jksM] ifV;kyk]

jkT; % iatkc

fiu % 147004

46-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj

fouksckuxj ,DlVsa'ku] lkxj]

ftyk % f'keksxk&577401

47-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj

uanh;ky jksM] dMFkh&583137

gjiugYyh] ftyk % nko.kxsjs

48-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj

gksleus ,DlVsa'ku 'kk[kk]

ek:rh Ñik fcYMhax]

lqcÕ;k gkWfLiVy ds ikl]

tsy jksM] f'keksxk

49-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj

Ñ".kk dSisQ]

vÕ;k vkdsZM]

nhid isVªksy iai ds lkeus]

cad] ch-,p- jksM]

f'keksxk&577201

50-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj

#778@1] nwxkZ vafcdk Ldwiy jksM]

ljLorh uxj] cMkous]

Mko.kxsjs&577005

51-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj

#1946@lh] nwxkZorh vkdsZM]

ih-ch- jksM] Mko.kxsjs&577006

52-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj

lhVh,l] ua- 48@lh]

IykWV ua- 36]

cl LVSaM ds ikl] vUuhxsjh&582201

ftyk % /kjokM

53-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj] vyukoj]

fcYMhax ua- 401] okMZ ua- 1] bafnjkuxj]

f'kokth gkWfLiVy ds lkeus]

cl LVSaM ds fiNs] vyukoj]

ftyk % /kjokM

54-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

Vh,elh ua- 1281]

oh-,e- ekyxh dkWEIysDl]

oqQLrkxh jksM] xtsanzx<+&582114]

ftyk % xnx

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6143

55-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

lhVh,l ua- 3891@2ch]

'kkaHkoh esMhdYl] oqQach dkWEIysDl]

gksVy T;ksfr ds lkeus] ctkj jksM]

y{es'oj&582116

ftyk xnx

56-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

fjIijuisVs iksLV vkWfiQl ds lkeus]

lkxj jksM] fjIiuisVs]

gkslkuxj rkyqdk]

ftyk % f'keksxk&577426

57-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

xzke % tMs] ljksck rkyqdk]

ftyk % f'keksxk&577419

58-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

esu jksM] ryxqIikj] lkxj rkyqdk]

ftyk % f'keksxk&511430

59-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

iqjkuk cl LVSaM dkWEIysDl]

f'kjkydksIik] lksjkck rkyqdk]

ftyk f'keksxk&511428

60-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

IykWV ua- 109 vkSj 110] jktkth uxj]

lrqdj] /kjokM&580009

61-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

79@,] 12@,lih E;wfufliy ua-

10920] okMZ Ø- 14 xqatu dkWEIysDl]

lIriqj] /kjkokM&580001

62-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

lhVh,l ua- 1986] 1987 vkSj 1988]

U;w bafXy'k LowQy ds ikl]

cksEekaiqj] ihch jksM]

gqcyh&580028

63-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

nko.kxsjs ;qfuo£lVh dSEil]

f'koxaxks=kh] rksykgkSl] nko.kxsjs

ftyk % nko.kxsjs

64-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

,ih,elh dkWEIysDl]

cl LVSaM ds ikl]

lokukSj] gkosjh

65-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

oqaQMxksy 'kk[kk] /kjokM]

'ksVVkj vksuh] oqQaMxksy&581113

ftyk % /kjokM

66-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

fe=k ysvkmV] eaMsgYyh jksM]

fo|k uxj] fp=knwxZ

67-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

#1956@lh3] nwxkZorh vkdsZM]

'kadj fogkj] gfjgjk jksM]

,yvkblh vkiQ bafM;k ds ikl]

nko.kxsjs

68-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

IykWV ua- 109 vkSj 110]

jktkth uxj] lÙkqj] /kjokM]

ftyk % /kjokM

69-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

fon~;kuxj] vuqxzg] ch-,p- jksM]

fon~;kuxj] f'keksxk] f'keksxk

70-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

xqMMnk vkdsZM] lkxj jksM] f'keksxk]

f'keksxk

71-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

Vhihlh 853 Mh@Mh1@Mh 2]

ih Mh] 'ksVVkj dkWEys vkDlj]

ds,lvkjVhlh cl LVSaM]

ghjsds:j] ghjsds:j

72-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

uoyxqaM 'kk[kk]

x.ks'k dkWEysDlh]

cl LVSaM ds ikl] uoyxqaM]

ftyk % /kjokM

73-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

cadkiqj 'kk[kk

lhVh,l ua- 1986] 1987] 1988]

U;wc bafXy'k LowQy] cEeiwj vksfu]

ih vkj jksM] gqcyh

74-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

JhjkgVVh 'kk[kk] cqjcqjs fcYMhax]

pqCchx jksM] cl LVSaM ds ikl]

JhjkgVVh&582 120] ftyk xnx

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6144

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

75-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

xqtekxMh jkSu rkyqdk]

xqtekxMh xzke] ftyk % xnx

76-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

lhVh,l ua- 3133] eqYykjuch ØkWl]

xnx esu jksM] jksu] xnx

77-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

xkSjEek egkjktisV fcYMhax]

iqjkuh ,lchvkbZ fcYMhax]

u;s cl LVSaM ds ikl]

gkuxy

78-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

ihch ua- 3] ,lohih dkWyksuh]

lkxj rkyqdk] tksx iQkYLy]

f'keksxk ds ikl

79-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

esu jksM] lkxj rkyqdk]

ryxqIikj] f'keksxk

80-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

eqaMjxh 'kk[kk]

MkW- okbZ,l- esVh fcYMhax]

ts-,- dkWyst] esu jksM]

eaqaMjxh&580118 ftyk % xnx

81-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

iksLV ckWDl 1] ch-,p- jksM]

fuMhxs ihvks]

ftyk % f'keksxk] esykokxksIikc]

gfjxs

82-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

IykWV ua- 2] vkj ,l ua- 10]

CykWd ua- 2] fpDdaudksIik]

Jh pUukohj vkU/zk]

dY;k.k vkJe dkWEysIikDl]

esu jksM] uokuxj] gqcyh

83-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

,ih,e ds ikl] gqcyh dkjokj jksM]

dy?kVxh] dy?kVxh] xnx

84-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

lh,lVh ua- 2115@2116]

Vh,elh jksM] ekdsZV]

ujxqan

85-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

f'kXxkauo 'kk[kk] jk;dj fcYMhax]

iqjkus cl LVSaM ds ikl]

f'kXxkauo&581205]

ftyk % gkosjh

86-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

gsCcklwj 'kk[kk]

la- 122] czkfgu xyh]

gsCcklqj xkao fiu&571342

pkejktuxj rkyqd]

ftyk&pkejktuxj

87-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

gqX;k 'kk[kk la- 502]

feU;e eq[; ekxZ]

gqX;k xk¡o fiu&571444]

dksYysxky rkyqd]

ftyk&pkejktuxj

88-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

gksaxkuwj 'kk[kk]

1@6] czkfáu xyh]

gksaukuwj rkyqd]

ftyk&pkejktuxj

89-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

nksbfMbanqokMh 'kk[kk

ua- 1489] jktdh; mPp fo|ky;

ekxZ] nksbfMbanqokMh xk¡o]

fiu&571443

dksYysxky rkyqd pkejktuxj

90-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

;sjxkEcYyh 'kk[kk]

ua- 907@1] u;k foLrkj]

eaMy iapk;r jksM]

;sjxkEcYyh&571441

;syanwj rkyqd

ftyk&pkejktuxj

91-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

'kX;k 'kk[kk]

xknZu gkSl rksfe;kj ikY;e jksM]

'kX;k xk¡o] dksYysxky rkyqd]

ftyk pejktuxj

92-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

VsYyuqj 'kk[kk

ua- 30 ekjEek xyh

VsYyuqj 571440

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6145

93-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

vEckys 'kk[kk

ua- 107] ,l-lh- xyh

vEckys xk¡o fiu&571441]

;sykUnqj rkyqd

ftyk pkejktuxj

94-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

xksuhdksIiy 'kk[kk]

gjhn'kZu vkdsZM]

xksuhdksIiy eq[; ekxZ]

fojktisV rkyqd

ftyk dksMxq

xksuhdksIiy 571213

95-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

egkuanh dkEIysDl

ih-,p- ekxZ] csV~Vniqjk

isfj;kisVuk rkyqd

csV~Vniqjk

96-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

gyxqj 'kk[kk

688@1] 686@1,]

nsofxjh] pUuiV~Vuk ekxZ]

1st Øksl] gyxqj&571421

eyoYyh rkyqd

97-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

csYyqj Økl 'kk[kk]

338 'ksV~Vh dkEIysDl

;synYyh ekxZ ch-xh- uxj]

iksLV&cYyqj]

gkscyh&571418

ukxeaxyk rkyqd

98-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]

eSlwj esfMdy dkWyst 'kk[kk]

esfMdy dkWyst Hkou]

jsyos LVs'ku ekxZ]

eSlwj&570001

99-

vkU/zk cSad

dksÙkjisV 'kk[kk

lwjoje jksM

rqfu&533401

iwoZ xksnkojh ftyk

vkU/z izns'k

100-

vkU/zk cSad

cjukyk 'kk[kk]

czkbl Iykj”kk]

ds lh ekxZ] cjukyk

iatkc&148101

101-

vkU/zk cSad

ukHkk 'kk[kk]

ljdqyj jksM ckSju xsV]

ukHkk&147201

102-

vkU/zk cSad

lax:j 'kk[kk]

'kghn Hkxr ¯lg pkSd]

lax:j] iatkc&148001

103-

vkU/zk cSad

xqaMeiYyh 'kk[kk]

fnykojiqj eaMy]

vkfnykckn ftyk]

vkU/zk izns'k&504306

104-

vkU/zk cSad

cksFk 'kk[kk]

ljdkjh twfu;j dkWyst jksM]

cksFk] vkfnykckn ftyk]

vkU/zk izns'k&504305

105-

vkU/zk cSad

dksÙkjdks.Mka 'kk[kk] eq[;k jkLrk]

HkhensojiYyhr eaMy

djheuxj ftyk

vkU/zk izns'k&505471

106-

vkU/zk cSad

dqdquwj 'kk[kk]

edku ua- 7&91@1]

eq[;u jkLrk] dqdquwj]

[kEeue ftyk

vkU/zk izns'k&507114

107-

vkU/zk cSad

Hkksiky 'kk[kk]

la- 36] HknHkík jksM]

Hkksiky]

eè; izns'k&462063

108-

vkU/zk cSad

y[kumQ 'kk[kk]

16] fo/ku lHkk ekxZ]

y[kuÅ] mÙkj izns'k&226018

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6146

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

109-

vkU/zk cSad

bykgkckn 'kk[kk]

iksLV ckWDl ua- 9992]

tkWUlu xat] 158] iUnjhck]

bykgkckn] mÙkj izns'k]

fiu 211003

110-

vkU/zk cSad

xhrk okfVdk 'kk[kk]

eSdsfudy odZ'kkWi] m-iw- jsyos]

xksj[kiqj] mÙkj izns'k&273012

111-

vkU/zk cSad

vkj ds uxj 'kk[kk]

e-la- 111@155] IykWV la- 5]

dfudk vLirky ds ikl]

g"kZ uxj] dkuiqj]

mÙkj izns'k&208012

112-

vkU/zk cSad

dpgjh 'kk[kk]

flfoy dksV ifjlj]

xksj[kiqj] mÙkj izns'k&273001

113-

vkU/zk cSad

v'kksdk xkMZu 'kk[kk]

iz;kl Hkou] tsy jksM]

Hkksiky] eè; izns'k

114-

vkU/zk cSad

v;ksè;k uxj 'kk[kk]

49] tqfu;j ,e vkbZ th]

v;ksè;k uxj]

Hkksiky eè; izns'k&462041

115-

vkU/zk cSad

bfUnjk uxj 'kk[kk]

lsDVj 9] bafnjk uxj]

y[kumQ] mÙkj izns'k&226016

116-

vkU/zk cSad

rkjkeaMy 'kk[kk]

xksj[kiqj fodkl izkf/dj.k]

jkex< rky] nsofj;k ckbZikl]

xksj[kiqj] mÙkj izns'k

117-

vkU/zk cSad

vkye ckx 'kk[kk] ds,l,e Vkoj]

lh ih&1] vkye ckx]

y[kumQ] mÙkj izns'k&226004

118-

vkU/zk cSad

flfoy ykbZUl 'kk[kk]

ifj.k; oq¡Qt] 1@174] flfoy ykbUl]

ckx iQjtkuk jksM] vkxjk]

mÙkj izns'k&282002

119-

vkU/zk cSad

vyhx<+ 'kk[kk]

4@1399 'kgtkn ekdsZV]

tkfe;k mQnwZ] esfMdy jksM]

flfoy ykbZUl]

vyhx<+] mÙkj izns'k&202002

120-

vkU/zk cSad

cqyUn'kgj 'kk[kk]

235] flfoy ykbZUl]

dkyk vke] cqyan 'kgj]

mÙkj izns'k&203001

121-

vkU/zk cSad

cjsyh 'kk[kk]

35,@8] jkeiqj xkMZu]

cjsyh] mÙkj izns'k&243001

122-

vkU/zk cSad

eFkqjk 'kk[kk]

1947@1 vkSj , dkfyUnh oq¡Qt]

nkfEi;j uxj] LVs'ku jksM]

eFkqjk] mÙkj izns'k&281001

123-

vkU/zk cSad

lgkjuiqj 'kk[kk]

3@6783] ¯yd jksM]

ghjks gksaMk ,tsalh ds lkeus]

lgkjuiqj] mÙkj izns'k&247001

124-

vkU/zk cSad

eqtÝiQjuxj 'kk[kk]

313@1 nf{k.k Hkksik jksM]

eqtÝiQj uxj] mÙkj izns'k&251001

125-

vkU/zk cSad

eqjokMk 'kk[kk]

IykWV la- 31]58] 86 o 87@2]

t; n;ky jksM] lqHkk"k jksM]

eqjokMk (dVuh) eè; izns'k

126-

vkU/zk cSad

fefJ[k 'kk[kk] fefJ[k 'kk[kk]

ukgj pkSjkgk] lhrk iqj jksM] feljh[k]

mÙkj izns'k&261401

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6147

127-

vkU/zk cSad

'kgtukoka 'kk[kk]

iqjkuk eaxy cktkj] 'kkgtuok]

xksj[kiqj] mÙkj izns'k&273209

128-

vkU/zk cSad

vrjkSyh 'kk[kk]

vrjkSyh [kk] dkWyst jksM]

xkso/Zu /ke] vrjksyh vyhx<+]

mÙkj izns'k&202280

129-

vkU/zk cSad

[kyhykckn 'kk[kk]

xksyk cktkj] esu ekdsZV]

lar dchj uxj] [kyhykckn]

mÙkj izns'k&272175

130-

vkU/zk cSad

elwjh 'kk[kk]

eokuk jksM] elwjh]

esjB] mÙkj izns'k&250001

131-

vkU/zk cSad

ckjkcadh 'kk[kk]

oekZ ekdsZV iwohZ Nksj]

iSQtkckn jksM] ckjkcadh]

mÙkj izns'k&225001

132-

vkU/zk cSad

lhrkiqj 'kk[kk]

,e ,e esgjks=kk Hkou]

13&ch LVs'ku jksM] lhrkiqj]

mÙkj izns'k

133-

vkU/zk cSad

nsofj;k 'kk[kk]

IykWV la= 328] dksrokyh jksM]

nsofj;k mÙkj izns'k&274001

134-

vkU/zk cSad

esMjkikj 'kk[kk]

enkjiqj xkao]

iks- c[khjk] cxqyh CykWd]

lar dchj uxj]

mÙkj izns'k&272159

135-

vkU/zk cSad

o`Unkou 'kk[kk]

225] je.k jsrh] Jh th iSysl]

o`Unkou] mÙkj izns'k&281121

136-

vkU/zk cSad

xkserh uxj 'kk[kk]

xksirh uxj&] fou; [kaM]

y[kumQ] mÙkj izns'k&226010

137-

vkU/zk cSad

/kuqiwjk 'kk[kk] xk¡o yks/hiqj]

jktiwr] fnYyh jksM]

/kuqiwjk ftyk eksjknkckn]

mÙkj izns'k&244102

138-

vkU/zk cSad

fctukSj 'kk[kk] ';ke fogkj]

fdjkriqj jksM] fctukSj y[kumQ

mÙkj izns'k&226701

139-

vkU/zk cSad

iYyoiqje 'kk[kk]

lh&3@1] ikWdsV&Vh]

iYyoiqje&isQt&II]

esjB] mÙkj izns'k&250110

140-

vkU/zk cSad

vkSax 'kk[kk] xkao ,oa iksLV vkSax]

th Vh jksM] ftyk iQrgiqj]

mÙkj izns'k&212665

141-

vkU/zk cSad

fot;uxj 'kk[kk]

;qth&18] 19 o 20] xzkmaM Ýyksj]

eaxy IykWV la- A-1PU-4]

dkWe£'k;y Ldhe] ,ch jksM]

fot; uxj] bUnkSj]

eè; izns'k&452001

142-

vkU/zk cSad

fodkl uxj 'kk[kk]

lh ih&1] ih th vkoj]

oqQ'khZ jksM] fodkl uxj]

y[kumQ] mÙkj izns'k&226010

143-

vkU/zk cSad

fnYyh jksM 'kk[kk] xk¡/h dkWEIysDl]

nsgyh jksM] eqjknkckn]

mÙkj izns'k&244001

144-

vkU/zk cSad

>kalh 'kk[kk]

372@44&45] Xokfy;j jksM]

flfoy ykbZUl] >kalh]

mÙkj izns'k&284001

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6148

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

145-

vkU/zk cSad

bVkok 'kk[kk]

759&C] g"kZ uxj] dpgjh jksM]

bVkok] mÙkj izns'k&206001

146-

vkU/zk cSad

xks.Mk 'kk[kk]

edku la- 45] xqM~Mwey pkSjkgk]

ekyoh; uxj] xks.Mk]

mÙkj izns'k&271001

147-

vdcjk&3051

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

xzke vdcjk] iksLV % vjrksuh]

rglhy&fdjkoyh]

ftyk&vkxjk&2820079 (m-iz-)

148-

,Vk&2997

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

gksVy f'k[kj] vkxjk jksM]

U;w cl LVS.M ds ikl]

,Vk&207001 (m-iz-)

149-

fiQjks”kckn&3011 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

eq[; Mkd?kj ds lkeus]

vkokl fodkl dkyksuh]

lqgkx uxj]

fiQjks”kkckn&283201 (m-iz-)

150-

o`gr dkjiksjsV

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

'kk[kk (2745) o`gr dkjiksjsV 'kk[kk]

prqFkZ ry]

jpuk flusek fc¯YMx]

2 jktsUnz Iysl] iwlk jksM]

ubZ fnYyh&110008

151-

feM dkjiksjsV

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad]

'kk[kk (2746) o`gr dkjiksjsV 'kk[kk]

prqFkZ ry] jpuk flusek fc¯YMx]

2 jktsUnz Iysl] iwlk jksM]

ubZ fnYyh&110008

152-

taxiqjk (2792) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad]

115] efLtn jksM taxiqjk

ubZ fnYyh&110014

153-

dh£ruxj (2964) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad]

1&107, Hkw&ry] dh£ruxj]

ubZ fnYyh&110015

154-

lsDVj&11

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad]

jksfg.kh]

frfr{kk ifCyd LowQy lsDVj&11]

(3248)

jksfg.kh] ubZ fnYyh&110085

155-

cnjiqj (3249) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad]

416] fudV rqxydkckn esVªks LVs'ku]

eFkqjk jksM] cnjiqj] ubZ fnYyh&110044

156-

vtesj 476

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

vkj-lh- MkW;lu lkslkbVh vkWiQ

vtesj dsljxat] vtesj]

fiudksM % 305001] ftyk vtesj

157-

vyoj 385

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

;w th ,iQ Mªhe”k]

lkeus ljdkjh cPpksa dk vLirky]

u”knhd iqjkuk ikWoj gkmQl jksM]

xkSjo ikFk] vyoj 'kgj]

fiudksM&301001] ftyk vyoj

158-

vyoj xsV]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

vtesj 1668

ulhjkckn jksM] vyoj xsV]

vtesj] fiudksM&305001]

ftyk&vtesj

159-

ckWEcs eksVj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

l£dy] tks/iqj 'kks#e ua- 3] j.kohj Hkou]

ukSoh pkSilkuh jksM]

tks/iqj fiudksM&342001

160-

cuh ikdZ 562

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

,@lh&2] t;¯lg l£dy]

u”knhd dksySDVksjsV] cuh ikdZ]

t;iqj] fiudksM&302006]

ftyk t;iqj

161-

HkhyokM+k 1487 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

ua- 1&5] vkdkj VkWoj]

iqjkuk vkjVh vks jksM] HkksyokMk]

fiudksM&311001] ftyk&HkhyokM+k

162-

chdkusj 1608

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

8 iksdj DokWVj] pkSijk dryk]

jkuh ck”kkj] chdkusj]

fiu 5 334001] ftyk % chdkusj

163-

fHkokM+h 2166

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

IykV la- 3A/7] ;w vkbZ Vh dkWyksuh]

xkSjo ikFk] fHkokM+k

164-

Lh&Ldhe 2137 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

J-54-C lujkbZl] i`Fohkt jksM]

lh&Ldhe] t;iqj]

fiudksM % 302001]

ftyk&t;iqj

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6149

165-

nsoyh 2371

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

IykWV ua- 1] izse oqaQt]

ihNs ihj ckck] iVsy uxj]

nsoyuh] fiu % 304804

ftyk & Vksad

166-

iQrsgiqj 1404

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

17 ifjgkj 'kkW¯ix lSaVj]

fldkfj;k pkSjkgk 'ksgkorh] iQrsgiqj]

fiu % 332301] ftyk&lhdj

167-

,e-vkbZ jksM

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

158

11 Írqjkt fc¯YMx] ,e-vkbZ- jksM]

t;iqj] fiu% 302001] ftyk t;iqj

168-

tks/iqj 901

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

IykWV ua- 1] lu'kkbu fc¯YMx

(igyk ry)] ubZ lM+d]

tks/iqj fiu % 342001

ftyk&tks/iqj

169-

fd'kux<+ 1909 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

IykWV ua- Mh- 108 (,&2)]

,u ,p&8] fd'kux<+]

fiu % 305801] ftyk&vtesj

170-

dksVk 1471

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

15 cYyHk uxj] jkorork jksM]

dksVk fiu % 327004]

ftyk&dksVk

171-

djkSyh 2228

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

vt; fuokl] xqykc ckx]

djkSyh fiu& 322241]

ftyk&djkSyh

172-

[ksrM+h uxj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2173

lSaVªy LowQy dSEil 1]

[ksrM+h uxj]

>qU>quq fiu % 333504]

ftyk&>qU>quq

173-

dksfYgu uxj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

481

lh&17] dksfygu uxj]

[ksrM+h] fiu % 333503]

ftyk&>qU>quq

174-

ekyoh; uxj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

1549

Mh&672] ekyoh; uxj]

t;iqj fiu % 302017]

ftyk t;iqj

175-

ekuljksoj 1622 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

vkbZ vkbZ vkj ,e dSEil]

VSxksj ekxZ] lsDVj 11]

vxzoky iQkeZ]

ekuljksoj]

t;iqj] fiu& 302020]

ftyk&t;iqj

176-

eqckjdiqj 653 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

u”knhd cl LVSaM] fd'kux<+ jksM]

xzke ,oa Mkd[kkuk] eqckjdiqj]

fiu % 301025] ftyk&vyoj

177-

jktsUnz uxj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2174

C/o vkn'kZ fo|k eafnj LowQy]

jktsUnz uxj] vyoj

fiu % 301001] ftyk&vyoj

178-

:ickl 3100

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

,l 42&45]

ouLFkyh eksM Mkd[kkuk]

fuokbZ rqYd baMLVªh;y {ks=k]

11 Mh lSaVj] xzke :ickl]

fiu % 304022 ftyk 5 Vksad

179-

lhdj jksM 1693 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

Jh Hkokuh fudsru dkWyst dSEil]

lhdj jksM] t;iqj

fiu 5 302023 ftyk&t;iqj

180-

lhrkiqjk 1926

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

th&89] bZ ih vkbZ ih]

vkj vkbZ vkbZ lh vks baMLVªh; {ks=k]

lhrkiqjk

181- Jhxaxkuxj 1917 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

5&,&8 ehjk ekxZ] tokgj uxj]

Jhxaxkuxj] fiu % 335001

ftyk&Jhxaxkuxj

182- fryd uxj 381 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

4 'kkW¯ix lSaVj] fryd uxj ekdsZV]

fryd uxj] t;iqj]

fiu % 302004] ftyk&t;iqj

183- mn;iqj 695

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

10 iap'khy ekxZ

(lkeus VkmQu gkWy) igyk ry]

mn;iqj fiu % 313001]

ftyk&mn;iqj

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6150

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

184-

oS'kkyh uxj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

1539

¶,iQ&CykWd¸ IykWV ua- ,l-vkj 3&,]

u”knhd dE;wfuVh lSaVj]

vejikyh ekxZ] oS'kkyh uxj] t;iqj]

fiu % 302021] ftyk&t;iqj

185-

, vkj ,e

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

t;iqj 2576

{ks=kh; dk;kZy;] t;iqj] igyk ry]

fj¼h VkWoj] ,l ch&57] ckiw uxj]

VkWd jksM] t;iqj&302015

186-

ekapok 3223

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

xzke ekapok] eq[; dyoj jksM]

u”knhd iapk;r lfefr]

rglhy >ksVokMk]

t;iqj fiu % 302012

y[kumQ {ks=k

187-

vkfLr olwyh

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

izca/u 2594

vouokbZ esa'ku] fo/ku lHkk ekxZ]

y[kumQ&226001] m-iz-

188-

cgjkbp] 2675 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

flfoy ykbal] Lusg mRlo ds lkeus]

bafnjk LVsfM;e ds ikl]

ftyk cgjkbp&271801] m-iz-

189-

xksaMk] 2676

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

edku ua- 331] eksgYyk Nsnhiqjok]

cMxk¡vo iqfyl pkSdh cgjkbp jksM]

ftyk xksaMk] m-iz- fiu 271002

190-

dUukSt] 2978

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

7 ljkbZ cgknqj]

ftyk dUukSt] m-iz-]

fiu&209725

191-

iQrsgiqj] 2990 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

176@154 lh] Ñ".kk Vkoj]

dysDVj xat]

ftyk iQrsgiqj] 212601 m-iz-

192-

xksfoUn uxj]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

3022

126@,iQ&1] xksfoUn uxj]

ftyk dkuiqj nsgkj]

m-iz-] fiu&208006

193-

fdnobZ uxj]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

3024

1334@34 ¶vks¸ Cykd]

fdnobZ uxj] ftyk&dkuiqj nsgkr]

m-iz-] fiu&208023

194-

egkuxj] 3025 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

ch&67] lsDVj&lh]

egkuxj] y[kumQ&226006] m-iz-

195-

jSfiM fjVsy

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

lsaVj] 3056

uopsruk dsanz] 10 v'kksd ekxZ]

y[kumQ&226001] m-iz-

196-

Hkw;s emQ] 3071 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

xzke o i=kky;&Hkw;s emQ]

ektjk eqfygk emQ]

ftyk&jk;cjsyh&229001] m-iz-

197-

vgek emQ]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

3072

i`Foh xsLV gkml ds lkeus]

lqyrkuiqj jksM] vgek emQ]

y[kumq&226002] m-iz-

198-

fl/kSyh] 3195

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

Vhpj dkyksuh]

cgknqjiqj] xk¡/h fo|ky; baVj dkyst

ds lkeus]

fl/kSyh&261303]

ftyk&lhrkiqj] m-iz-

199-

caFkjk] 3232

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

jktiwr ufl±x gkse]

caFkjk Fkkus ds lkeus]

caFkjk fldUnjiqj&227101]

ftyk&y[kumQ] m-iz-

200-

vk; lekt

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

jksM] 3001

Mh-,-oh- dkWyst fc¯YMx] izFke ry]

vk;Z lekt jksM] eqtÝiQjuxj]

fiu 251001 m-iz-

201-

vkj-th- b.Vj& bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

dkWtst] 2803

vkj-th- b.Vj dkWyst] Nhih VSad]

esjB] fiu 251001 m-iz-

202-

'kkgtgk¡iqj]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2801

xVqdk ykWt] xksfoUn xat 'kk[kk]

ftyk&'kkgtgk¡iqj]

fiu 242001 m-iz-

203-

fctukSj] 3002

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

Hkwry] flfoy ykbal 11]

uqekb'k eSnku ds lkeus]

ftyk fctukSj]

fiu 246701 m-iz-

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6151

204-

lgkjuiqj] 2981 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

fof'k"V ,l ,e bZ 'kk[kk] ,&8]

vkokl fodkl] fnYyh jksM]

lgkjuiqj] fiu 247001 m-iz-

205-

vejksgk] 2980 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

Hkwry] iDdk ckx] fctukSj jksM]

T;ksfrck iwQysuxj] vejksgk]

fiu 244221 m-iz-

206-

ihyhHkhr 'kk[kk] bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2802

ihyhHkhr 'kk[kk] 94&v'kksd dkWyksuh]

flfoy ykbal] lkmFk ihyhHkhr]

fiu 262001 m-iz-

207-

psnkSlh 'kk[kk]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2800

pankSlh 'kk[kk] 2&lkdsr dkWyksuh]

pankSlh] fiu 202412 m-iz-

208-

iQrqgk 2761

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

esu jksM] xSl xksnke ds ikl]

nfj;kiqj] u;k Vksyk] iQrqgk]

ftyk iVuk] fiu dksM&803201

209-

usmQjk 3062

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

lqjsUnz esfMdy dkWyst ,oa gkWfLiVy]

f'kokyk eksM ds ikl]

usmQjk] ftyk&iVuk]

fiu dksM&801113

210-

dk¡Vh 2760

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

'kadj ekdsZV] dk¡Vh pkWd]

iksLV vkWfiQl ds ikl] eq”kÝiQjiqj]

fiu dksM&843109

211-

eksfrgkjh 2851 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

f}rh; ry 'kj.k dkWEIysDl]

VkmQu gkWy eksfrgkjh]

f”kyk&iwohZ pEikj.k]

fiu dksM&845401

212-

nqYyhiV~Vh

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

3206

xzk- ,oa iksLV&nqYyhiV~Vh]

Fkkuk t;uxj]

f”kyk&e/qcuh] fiu dksM&847226

213-

eksgucfj;e

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

3207

xzk- eksgucfj;e]

iksLV vkWfiQl dUgkSyh]

}kjk&ldjh] ftyk&e/qcuh]

fiu dksM&847239

214-

uoknk 2865

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

izFke ry] xk;=kh nsoh Hkou]

iqjkuk cl LVs.M] x;k jksM ij uoknk]

fiu dksM&805110

215-

fd'kuxat 2913 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

'kcue ekdsZV if'peikyh pkWd]

fd'kuxat] fiu dksM&855108

216-

lklkjke 3167

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

Jh Jh ckykth dkWEIysDl]

th-Vh- jksM] ftyk % jksgrkl]

lklkjke fiu dksM&821115

217-

csfr;k 3168

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

ek#fr esdj fc¯Mx] lqfiz;k jksM]

csfr;k] ftyk&if'pe pEikj.k

fiu dksM&845438

218-

lh-ch-vks- 3012 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

flVh cSad vkWfiQl]

401 vk/kjf'kyk dkWEIysDl]

nf{k.kh xk¡/h eSnku] iVuk]

f”kyk&iVuk] fiu dksM&800001

219-

vkj-vkj-lh-

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

3013

vkj-vkj-lh]

401 vk/kjf'kyk dkWEIysDl]

nf{k.kh xk¡/h eSnku] iVuk]

f”kyk&iVuk] fiu dksM&800001

220-

lSfud dkyksuh] bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

iQjhnkckn]

,llh,iQ 66 lSfud dkWyksuh]

3349

lsDVj&49] de£'k;y ekdsZV]

viksftV Mh,oh LowQy]

iQjhnkckn&121001

221-

lsDVj&8]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

iQjhnkckn]

,llh,iQ 203] lsDVj&8]

3376

gqMk ekdsZV] iQjhnkckn

222-

vkj-vkj-lh-]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

xqMxk¡o] 3343

izFke ry] ;kno Hkou]

vksYM jsyos jksM]

xqM+xk¡o&122001

223-

lsDVj&5]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

xqM+xk¡o] 3374

nqdku ua- 2]

'khryk vlksfl,V~l ds ikl]

'khryk ekrk eafnj jksM]

viksftV lsDVj&5] xqM+xk¡o

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6152

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

224-

Ntkjlh]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

uks,Mk] 3178

lh,p CykWd xk¡o] Ntkjlh]

viksftV lsDVj&63]

uks,Mk&201307

225-

'kjiQkckn]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

uks,Mk] 3315

lsDVj&73] y{eh dkWEiysDl]

'kjiQkckn] uks,Mk&201301

226-

tyiqjk]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

gynksuh] 3364 [kljk ua- 689]

pkS/jh fcckjh ¯lg ekdsZV]

tyiqjk gynksuh eksM+]

iksLV&oqQys'kjk&201306

227-

lsDVj&22]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

uks,Mk] 3375

viksftV ts&55] xk¡o pkSjk]

lsDVj&22] uks,Mk&201301

228-

Íf"kds'k

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(1458)

vksedkjkuan Hkou] equh dh jsrh]

Íf"kds'k&249201

ftyk&fVgjh x<oky

229-

gYnokuh

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(1467)

gksVy dkark]

dkark dkEiySDl 10&220]

cjsyh jksM] gY}kuh]

ftyk uSrhrky&263139

230-

usg: dkWyksuh

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(1489)

iks-cks-ua- 94] 160]

usg: dkWyksuh] gfj}kj jksM+

nsgjknwu&248001

231-

:nziqj (1591) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

,l-ts-,-Mh 'kkW¯ix dkWEiysDl

uSrhrky jksM] :nziqj]

m/e ¯lg uxj&263153

232-

gfj}kj (1692) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

'kkfr oqaQt ds ikl] Hkwirokyk]

gfj}kj&249410

233-

iVsyuxj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(2383)

32] dks&vkWijsfVo b.MfLVª;y ,fj;k]

idsy uxj]

nsgjknwu&248002

234-

dksVnokj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(2543)

egs'ojh vksVkseksckby ds ikl]

uthckckn jksM] dksV}kj&246149

235-

<a<sjk (2544)

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

xzke o iksLV MaMsjk&247667]

ftyk gfj}kj (mÙkjk[k.M)

236-

uSuhrky

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(2804)

111&112] rYyhrky] uSuhrky

237-

ckxs'oj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(2900)

rglhy jksM] ckxs'oj 'kk[kk]

ftyk&ckxs'oj&263642

238-

f'kokfyd uxj bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(2901)

94&v'kksd isQ”k&1]

ykbft;e xSLV gkmQl]

ch-,p-b-,y-] jkuhiqj&249403]

ftyk gfj}kj] mÙkjk[k.M

239-

Hkk:okyk xzkaV

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(3113)

iks-cks- dySEu VkmQu]

nsgjknwu&248002

240-

cgknqjiqj tV

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(3211)

xk¡o&cgknqjiqjtV]

CykWd cgknjkckn]

ftyk gfj}kjk&249404

241-

ljkbZ (3212)

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

xk¡o&ljkbZ] CykWd cgknjkckn]

ftyk&gfj}kjk&249404

242-

ekylh (3213) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

xk¡o&ekylh] CykWd lgliqj]

ftyk&nsgjknwu&248003

243-

ukFkuiqjk

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(3214)

xk¡o&ukFkuiqj] iks-vks-&usg: xzke]

CykWd jk;iqj]

ftyk&nsgjknwu&248010

244-

eksFkjksokyk

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(3215)

xk¡o&eksFkjksokyk] CykWd jk;iqj]

rglhy&iNoknwu]

ftyk&nsgjknwu&248115

245-

nsgjknwu]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

{ks=kh;

{ks=kh;] dk;kZy;] 595]

dk;kZy;

efyd pkSd] nsgjknwu

(2952)

fiu&246006

246-

fneuh 2536

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

edku ua- 67] uxjk ckck jksM]

iksLV&fneuh] rglhy&vack]

ftyk eqjSuk&476134

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6153

247-

jk;: 2553

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

10 o 11 jketh ekdsZV] oqQySFk jksM]

feykoyh jsyos LVs'ku ds ikl]

jk;j&474010] ftyk Xokfy;j

248-

bUnkSj&feM

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

dksiksZjV 2639

Ldhe ua- 54]

Jh lR; lkabZ fo|kfogkj dEikm.M]

ckEcs gkfLiVy jksM] fot; uxj]

bUnkSj] fiu&452010

249-

nfr;k 2640

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

edku la- 99@2]

uxj ikfydk Hkou ds lkeus]

nfr;k] eè; izns'k&475661

250-

FkkVhiqj&

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

Xokfy;j

edku la- 88] e;wj lkdsr]

2655

FkkVhiqj] ftyk&Xokfy;j]

eè; izns'k&474011

251-

fHk.M 2656

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

edku la- 363] okMz la- 12]

Xokfy;j eq[; ekxZ] fHk.M]

eè; izns'k&477001

252-

jhok 2872

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

,u,p-&7] cl LVS.M ds ikl]

vkfnR; gksVy ds cxy esa]

jhok] e-iz-

253-

ckyk?kkV 2873 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

okMZ la- 15] esu jksM ckyk?kkV]

ckyk?kkV] e-iz-

254-

[krjiqj 2954

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

IykWV ua- 243] 24 tokgj ekxZ]

Nrjiqj&471001 ftyk&Nrjiqj

255-

xquk 2956

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

IykWV ua- 96] esu jksM]

xquk&473001] ftyk&xquk

256-

tkSjh 2958

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

cht Hk.Mkj ds lkeus] tkSjk jksM]

tkSjh&476001] ftyk eqjSuk

257-

eanlkSj 2957

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

65@1] Mh vkj ih ykbu]

emQ uhep jksM]

eanlkSj&458001]

ftyk&eanlkSj

258-

uhep 2936

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

20] Ldhe ua- 1]

Vkmu gky jksM]

uhep&458441] ftyk&uhep

259-

iqjkuh Nkouh

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2953

losZ ua- 882] ,-ch- jksM]

VkVk eksckby Vkoj ds ikl]

iqjkuh Nkouh&474101]

ftyk&Xokfy;j

260-

flouh 2959

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

436] egkohj ef<+;k ds ikl]

th-,u- jksM] eaxyhisB] vktkn okMZ]

flouh&480661 ftyk&flouh

261-

iqjkluh 3132

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

Hkou la- 3733] , CykWd]

fLFkSyh jsyos LVs'ku ds ikl]

jsyos ¯Lizx iSQDVjh ds lkeus]

xzke iqjluh]

iksLV&vkbZ-Vh-,e- dkWyst]

fiu&474001] ftyk&Xokfy;j

262-

uSuksn 3131

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

IykWV ua- 139] xka/h uxj]

xzke&uSuksn 453112]

ftyk bankSj

263-

Hkojlyk 3130 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

IykV ua- 40] 41 'kkdacjh]

,osU;w dkWyksuh]

iksLV&Jh vj¯onks ,l vks]

xzke&Hkkojlyk 453555]

ftyk&bUnkSj

264-

ihify;k

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

ckt[kku

IykWV ua- 7 o 8]

3133

ihify;k ckt[kku jksM]

Hkkukiqj&462010]

ftyk&Hkksiky

265-

lruk 3188

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

[kljk ua- 252] lruk fc¯YMx]

jhok jksM] lruk&485001]

ftyk&lruk

266-

ohjiqj 3189

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

eyh ukdk] ohjiqj&474001]

ftyk&Xokfy;j

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6154

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

LIST OF OFFICES/ BRAN

(4) OF OFFICIAL LANGU

267-

cksjnk 3209

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

vkYVhesV baxfy'k foyk]

esu dksykj jksM]

xzke&cksjnk&462042

ftyk&Hkksiky

268-

ckyksn (2534) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

iqjkus cl LVsaM ds fudV]

ljnkj ysu] ckyksn

ftyk&nqxZ] fiu&491226

269-

cSoaqQBiqj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(2657)

IykV ua- 7] Cykd ua- 8]

esu jksM] cSoaqQBiqj]

ftyk&dksfj;k] fiu&497335

270-

lerk dkWyksuh

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(2984)

lh&97] lerk dkWyksuh]

jk;iqj] ftyk&jk;iqj

fiu&492001

271-

th-bZ- jksM

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(2985)

lkb± Vkoj]

vktkn iqfyl LVs'ku ds fudV]

vackikjk] jk;iqj]

ftyk&jk;iqj fiu&492001

272-

fgjhZ (3227)

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

fgjhZ] fHkyk eqvk ds fudV]

iksLV&fgjhZ] ftyk&fcykliqj]

fiu&495222

273-

jk¡ph eq[;

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

'kk[kk (0366) vkRekjke Hkou] ,e th ekxZ]

jk/s';ke ysu] jk¡ph]

fiu % 834001] ftyk&jk¡ph

274-

te'ksniqj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(0424)

10 flYoj dst ekWy (izFke ry)

Mk;xksuy jksM] fcLrqiqj]

te'ksniqj] fiu % 831001]

if'pe ¯lgHkwfe

275-

cksdkjks LVhy

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

lhVh (1246)

iqjkuk cktkj ckb ikl jksM]

pkWl ihvks] cksdkjks]

fiu 827013] ftyk % cksdkjks

276-

/uckn (0593) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

cSad eksM] dVjl jksM] /uckn]

fiu&826001] ftyk&/uckn

277-

cfj;krq jksM

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(0672)

vkejikyh fc¯YMx]

cfj;krq jksM] vkj ,e lh ,p]

ih-vks- jk¡ph]

fiu % 834008]

jk¡ph] ftyk % jk¡ph

278-

Dyc jksM

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(1563)

xksLuj dkWyst] tsy ppZ dkWEiysDl]

esu jksM] jk¡ph fiu dksM % 834001]

ftyk % jk¡ph

279-

iq:fy;k jksM

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(1508)

xzke xq: ,Mqds'ku dsanz]

iq:fy;k jksM jk¡ph]

fiu % 834001] ftyk % jk¡ph

280-

gtkjhckx

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(1486)

jes'k dkWEiysDl] cksíke ck”kkj]

ds-ch- ekxZ] gtkjhckx]

fiu 5% 825301] ftyk&gtkjhckx

281-

Mdjk (0558) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

Mdjk dksfy;kjh [ksyjh]

ih-vks- Mdjk]

fiu&829210] ftyk&jk¡ph

282-

dkads jksM

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(1639)

lsaVªy dksyfiQYM fy-] dkads jksM]

tokgj uxj] jk¡ph]

fiu % 834009] ftyk % jk¡ph

283-

ekuxks (1564) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

e/qlq/u nsosUnz yksd dkWEiysDl]

fMek jksM] ekuxks]

te'ksniqj] fiu % 831013]

ftyk % iwoZ ¯lgHkwfe

284-

ejkj (0454)

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

jk¡ph jksM] ejkj]

fiu % 829117]

ftyk % jkexj

285-

ckjhMhg

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(1511)

ejlh vLirky cjhMhg]

te'ksniqj] fiu % 831017]

ftyk % iwohZ ¯lgHkwfe

286-

usojh (0783)

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

fodkl fo|ky; usojh]

fiu % 835217] jk¡ph

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6155

287-

[kwVh (1182)

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

vij pkSd] esu jksM] [kwVh

fiu % 835210] ftyk % [kwVh

288-

nso?kj (1570) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

izFke ry ,y vkbZ lh fc¯YMx]

dpgsjh jksM] nso?kj fiu % 814112

ftyk % nso?kj

289-

fxjhMhg

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(0590)

edViqj ,lchvkb ekxZ] fxjhMhg]

fiu % 815301] ftyk % fxjhMhg

290-

xqeyk (1544) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

lkjnk ekdsZV dkWEiysDl]

ikydksV jksM] xqeyk]

fiu % 835207] ftyk % xqeyk

291-

lsDVj 9

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(1839)

lsDVj 9,] ¶ch¸ jksM]

cksdkjks LVhy flVh]

fiu % 827009 ftyk % cksdkjks

292-

vkfnR;iwj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(3003)

gksy¯Mx ua- 1839] izFke ry]

VkVk dsUnz] esu jksM]

vkfnR;iqj] fiu % 832109

ftyk % ljkbdsyk [kjlok

293-

Myrksuxat

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(3021)

lwjt uxj] csyokfrdj]

pkSd (esnuh uxj)] Myrksuxat]

iksLV&Myrksuxat] fiu % 822101

ftyk % iykew

294-

pØ/jiqj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(3141)

iqjkuk jk¡ph jksM]

jkuh lrh ,uDyso pØ/jiqj]

fiu % 833102]

ftyk % if'pe ¯lgHkwfe

295-

Mqejnxk

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(3152)

xzkmaM Ýyksj jktlFkyh bUdyso]

ih-,l- lnj] ih-vks- usojh]

xzke&Mqejnxk] fiu % 835217

ftyk % jk¡ph

296-

vksjeka>h

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(3170)

eerk ekdsZV] fkkuk vksjeka>h]

xzke&njnax (vksjeka>h)]

ih-vks- vksjeka>h]

fiu % 835219] ftyk % jk¡ph

297-

ykyxat

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(3321)

iratfy vkjksX;e ds ikl]

[ksyxk¡o] ih-vks-&lqxuq] ykyxat]

fiu % 835103] ftyk % jk¡ph

298-

bykgkckn

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

0350

61] ,e th ekxZ] flfoy ykbal]

bykgkckn] fiu % 211001]

ftyk&bykgkckn

299-

okjk.klh

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

0370

lh 7&34] ygqjkchj esu Øk¯lx]

okjk.klh] fiu % 221001]

ftyk % okjk.klh

300-

xksj[kiqj]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

0452

fot;k pkSd] xksj[kiqj]

fiu % 273001] ftyk&xksj[kiqj

301-

iqQyiqj

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

biQdks

f?k;k uxj] bykgkckn]

dkEiysDl]

tkSuiqj jksM] iqQyiqj]

0595

fiu % 212404] ftyk % bykgkckn

302-

okjk.klh dSaV]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

1002

52 ,oa 53 iVsy uxj dkyksuh]

¯eV gkml ds ikl] unslj]

okjk.klh dSaV fiu % 221002]

ftyk % okjk.klh

303-

eukSjh] 1523

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

th Vh jksM] ,;jiQkslZ LVs'ku xsV]

xq:}kjk ds lkeus] eukSjh]

fiu % 212208] ftyk % bykgkckn

304-

vk”kex<+]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

1604

jek dkEIysDl] iafMr nhu n;ky pkSd]

flfoy ykbu] vk”kex<+]

fiu % 276001] ftyk % vk”kex<+

305-

fe”kkZiqj]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

1618

czápkjh dk oqaQvk]

fj”koZ iqfyl ykbu ds ikl]

ohvkbZih jksM] fe”kkZiqj]

fiu % 231001] ftyk % fe”kkZiqj

306-

iQkfrek

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

vLirky]

u;k ckbZikl jksM] taxy lkfyxzke]

xksj[kiqj]

iMjh ck”kkj] xksj[kiqj]

1906

fiu % 273001]

ftyk&xksj[kiqj

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6156

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

307-

Xysufgy LowQy] bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

okjk.klh] 1968 Xysufgy LowQy]

eaMqvkMhg] okjk.klh]

fiu % 221103]

ftyk % okjk.klh

308-

lsaV tkslsiQ

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

LowQy]

flfoy ykbzal] xksj[kiqj]

xksj[kiqj]

fiu % 273009]

1972

ftyk % xksj[kiqj

309-

cSad jksM

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

'kk[kk] 2067

72] cSad jksM xksj[kiqj]

mÙkj izns'k] fiu% 273001]

ftyk % xksj[kiqj

310-

cM+gyxat]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2104

esu ekdsZV jksM] cM+gyxat]

fiu % 273402] ftyk&xksj[kiqj

311-

dkscjk ulZjh

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

LowQy]

1] dfj;Iik jksM u;k dSaV]

bykgkckn]

lc ,fj;k gsMDokVZlZ]

2163

bykgkckn] fiu&211001]

ftyk % bykgkckn

312-

fj”koZ iqfyl

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

ykbu]

fj”koZ iqfyl ykbu]

okjk.klh]

ikaMsiqj jksM]

2164

okjk.klh dSaV]

okjk.klh] fiu % 221002]

ftyk % okjk.klh

313-

izrkix<+]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2362

pkoyk vkdsZM] Hkaxok pqaxh]

izrkix<+] fiu % 230001]

ftyk % izrkix<+

314-

lqYrkuiqj&

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

flfoy

1077@3] flfoy ykbal]

ykbal]

cl LVSaM ds lkeus]

2386

lqYrkuiqj]

fiu % 228001

ftyk % lqYrkuiqj

315-

em vbek]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2471

171] LVs'ku jksM]

em vbek] bykgkckn]

fiu % 212501]

ftyk&bykgkckn

316-

fp=kowQV/ke

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

(dohZ)] 2472

440@2 }kjdk iqjh]

eankfduh jksM]

cank fMfo”ku ds lkeus]

tylaFkku] iqjkuh ck”kkj]

fiu % 210205

ftyk % fp=kowQV

317-

iV~Vh] 2511

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

gkml ua- 1] okMZ ua- 2]

flfoy ykbal] iV~Vh]

fiu % 230135

ftyk&izrkix<+

318-

egsok iV~Vh]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2556

46&ch] iqfyl iksLV ds lkeus]

egsok pkSd] usuh]

bykgkckn] fiu % 211007

ftyk&bykgkckn

319-

egkjktxat]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2557

IykWV ua- 2034] okMZ ua- 16]

dksrokyh iQjsUnz jksM]

gehn uxj] uxj ikfydk ifj"kn~]

egkjktxat] fiu % 273303]

ftyk% egkjktxat

320-

pankSyh] 2572

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

IykV ua- 453]

jek 'kadj vLirky ds cxy esa

pankSyh] fiu % 232104

ftyk % pankSyh

321-

eqxyljk;]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

2859

gkml ua- 581] th Vh jksM]

ubZ cLrh] eqxyljk;]

fiu % 232101

ftyk % y[kumQ

322-

xk”khiqj] 2860

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

136] ldysukckn]

tsy xsV ds lkeus] xk”khiqj]

fiu % 233001]

ftyk % xk”khiqj

323-

Hknksgh] 2983

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

102] LVs'ku jksM]

eYyw rkykc] Hknksgh]

fiu % 221401

ftyk % lar jfonkl uxj

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6157

324-

cLrh] 3014

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

gkml ua- 680&,] izgykn dkyksuh]

flfoy ykbal] cLrh]

fiu % 272001] ftyk % cLrh

325-

tkSuiqj] 3015

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

gkml ua- 21&,] izHkq dkEiysDl]

gqlSukckn] ts;lh pkSjkgk] tkSuiqj]

fiu % 222001] ftyk % tkSuiqj

326-

fHk[khiqj] 3079 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

16 ds ,p, 'kekZ VkolZ] fHk[khiqj]

iks-ck-&fe”kkZeqjkn] fiu % 221307

ftyk % okjk.klh

327-

vuijk] 3123

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

234@4] vuijk ck”kkj] flusek jksM]

iks-ck-&vuijk] fiu % 231225

ftyk % lksuHknz

328-

jkcV~Zlxat]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

3124

IykWV ua- 337] nsonhi dkEiysDl]

pUnh frjkgk ds ikl] jkcV~Zlxat]

fiu % 231216 ftyk % lksuHknz

329-

[kyhykckn]

bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad

3326

gkml ua- 136] okMZ ck”kkj]

mÙkj xksyk ck”kkj] usg: pkSd ds ikl]

[kyhykckn] fiu % 272175

ftyk % lar dchj uxj

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Financial Services)

New Delhi, 21st May, 2014

S.O.

2433.—In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of rule

10 of the Official Languages (use for official purpose of the

union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government, hereby notifies

the listed branches/offices of the following Banks in the

attached annexure, more than 80% of the staff whereof

have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi.

Serial

Name of the Banks

Number of

No.

Branches/Offices

1.

State Bank of India

45

2.

State Bank of Mysure

53

3.

Andhra Bank

48

4.

Indian Overseas Bank

183

Total

329

[F. No. 11016/13/2013-Hindi]

Dr. VED PRAKASH DUBEY, Jt. Director (OL)

List of Offices/Branches to be Notified Under Rule 10 (4)

of Official Language Rule 1976

Sr.

Branch

Name & Address of the Branch

No.

Code

(1)

(2)

(3)

1.

11961

State Bank of India

Opp Sant Baba Bhuri Wale

Tarn Taran Road Amritsar

Distt. : Amritsar

State : Punjab

Pin : 143006

2.

14651

State Bank of India

#2320/14, Main Bazar,

Bus Stand, Amritsar

State : Punjab

Pin : 143001

3.

15903

State Bank of India

54 INF-BDE

Opposite Dream Land Palace

Gate No. CP-6

Khasa, State : Punjab

Pin : 143017

4.

16308

State Bank of India

SGRC Hospital, Chhapara

Singh, Mehta Road, Amritsar

Distt. : Amritsar

State : Punjab

Pin : 143501

5.

5286

State Bank of India

CAC

Town Hall, Amritsar

Distt. : Amritsar

State : Punjab

Pin : 143001

6.

16142

State Bank of India

Opp. Dasmesh Sweet Shop

College Road, Gurdaspur

State : Punjab

Pin : 143521

7.

16421

State Bank of India

Near Simbal Chowk

Mamun, Pathankot

State : Punjab

Pin : 145001

8.

14657

State Bank of India

#219, Gandhi Nagar,

Gurdaspur Road,

Pathankot

State : Punjab

Pin : 145001

(1)

(2)

(3)

6158

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

9.

5292

State Bank of India

C.A.C., Main Branch Building

Pathankot, State : Punjab

Pin : 145001

10.

15875

State Bank of India

Regional Business Office,

Dhangu Road, Pathankot

State : Punjab

11.

13515

State Bank of India

Kurali, Distt. : Mohali

State : Punjab

Pin : 140103

12.

14630

State Bank of India

Booth No. 51

Sector-40 C,

Chandigarh

Pin : 160036

13.

14656

State Bank of India

# 1010, Sector - 68,

Mohali

Distt. : Mohali

State : Punjab

Pin : 160071

14.

16309

State Bank of India

126, Adjoining Tribune Colony,

Railway Road, Baltana

Distt. : Mohali

State : Punjab

Pin : 140604

15.

16413

State Bank of India

Chandigarh University

Campus, Kharar Morinda Road

Tehsil Kharar,

Distt. : Mohali

State: Punjab

Pin : 140413

16.

5283

State Bank of India

C.A.C, Sector-7C,

Chandigarh

Pin : 160007

17.

17022

State Bank of India

UIET, Sector 25

Chandigarh

Pin : 160014

18.

15904

State Bank of India

Gill Market

Sri Ber Sahib Road,

Sultanpur Lodhi

State : Punjab

Pin : 144626

19.

16141

State Bank of India

Ward-4, Near PNB Chowk

Main Road, Tanda

State : Punjab

Pin : 144204

20.

16144

State Bank of India

303 D-II Bela Chowk, Ropar

State : Punjab

Pin : 140001

21.

15874

State Bank of India

Regional Business Office

Bhupinder Plaza, Sirhind Road,

Patiala, State : Punjab

22.

1623

State Bank of India

ADB

Vill. Sandhaur

Tehsil: Malerkotla

Distt. : Sangrur

State : Punjab

Pin : 148020

23.

1759

State Bank of India

Main Branch

Patiala Gate

Sangrur

State : Punjab

Pin : 148001

24.

1762

State Bank of India

College Road, Malerkotla

State : Punjab

Pin : 148023

25.

2333

State Bank of India

VPO : Dhanaula

Distt. : Barnala

State : Punjab

Pin : 148105

26.

3316

State Bank of India

Manvi

Distt. : Sangrur

State : Punjab

Pin : 148023

27.

3317

State Bank of India

Sheron

Distt. : Sangrur

State : Punjab

Pin : 148106

28.

4200

State Bank of India

VPO: Dhuri,

Distt. : Sangrur

State : Punjab

Pin : 140051

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6159

29.

5575

State Bank of India,

Ladda Kothi,

Distt. : Sangrur,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 148034

30.

5577

State Bank of India,

Anaj Mandi, Sunam,

Distt. : Sangrur,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 148028

31.

6341

State Bank of India,

Barnala, State : Punjab,

Pin : 148101

32.

7400

State Bank of India,

Industrial Area, Sangrur,

Distt. : Sangrur,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 148001

33.

7509

State Bank of India,

VPO: Fathegarh Panjgrian,

Distt. : Sangrur,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 148025

34.

7521

State Bank of India,

Cheema Jodhpur,

Distt. : Barnala,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 148103

35.

11913

State Bank of India,

Ahmedgarh,

Distt. : Sangrur,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 141001

36.

11914

State Bank of India,

New Grain Market, Barnala,

Distt. : Barnala,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 148101

37.

11915

State Bank of India,

Mehal Kalan,

Distt. : Barnala,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 148101

38.

15031

State Bank of India,

Leela Bhawan Chowk,

1066/7, Near Gurudwara,

Kashmirian, Tripri, Patiala,

Distt. : Patiala,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 147001

39.

16489

State Bank of India,

New Grain Market,

Bhawanigarh, Distt. : Sangrur,

State : Punjab, Pin : 148026

40.

16508

State Bank of India,

Airawat Shopping Complex,

Patiala Cantt, Distt. : Patiala,

State : 147001

41.

16198

State Bank of India,

RGNU of Law Sidhuwal,

Bhadson Road, Sidhuwal,

Distt. : Patiala,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 147001

42.

16199

State Bank of India,

City Branch,

Post Office Road,

Mandi Gobindgarh,

Distt. : Fatehgarh Sahib,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 147301

43.

5179

State Bank of India,

Stressed Assets Recovery,

Branch, Sector-7C,

Chandigarh,

Pin : 160007

44.

5272

State Bank of India,

Sarb Amritsar,

Spl Comm. Branch, Ist Floor,

Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar,

Pin- 143001

45.

16901

State Bank of India,

Adjacent LG Show Room,

Near Hemkund Petrol Pump,

Sirhind Road , Patiala,

Distt. : Patiala,

State : Punjab,

Pin : 147004

46.

State Bank of Mysore,

Vinobanagar Extension, Sagar,

Shimoga Distt. 577 401

47.

State Bank of Mysore,

Nandyal Road, Kadthi - 583 137

Harapanahalli Taluk,

Davanagere Distt.

48.

State Bank of Mysore,

Hosamane Extension Branch,

Maruti Krupa Building,

Near Subaiyya Hospital,

Jail Road, Shimoga

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6160

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

49.

State Bank of Mysore,

"Ayya Arcade"

Opp: Deepak Petrol Bunk

B H Road, Shimoga - 577 201

50.

State Bank of Mysore,

# 778/1, Durgambika School

Road,

Saraswathi Nagar Badavane

Davanagere - 577 005

51.

State Bank of Mysore,

# 1946/C-3, Duggavathi Arcade

P B Road, Davangere - 577 006

52.

State Bank of Mysore,

CTS No. 48/C, Plot No. 36,

Near Bus Stand, Annigeri - 582 201,

Dharwad District

53.

State Bank of Mysore,

Building No. 401, Ward No.1,

Indiranagar,

Opp. Sajivini Hospital,

Behind Bus Stand,

Alnavar - 581 103, Dharwad

54.

State Bank of Mysore,

TMC No. 1281,

V M Malagi Complex,

Kustagi Road,

Gajendragad - 582 114,

Gadag District

55.

State Bank of Mysore,

CTS No. 3891/2B,

Near Shambavi Medicals,

Kumbi Complex,

Opp Hotel Jyothi, Bazaar Road,

Lakshmeshwar - 582116

Gadag District

56.

State Bank of Mysore,

Opp: Post Office, Sagar Road,

Ripponpete Hosanagar Taluk,

Shimoga Distt. -577 426

57.

State Bank of Mysore,

Jade Village, Soraba Taluk,

Shimoga Distt. - 577 419

58.

State Bank of Mysore,

Main Road, Talaguppa,

Sagar Taluk,

Shimoga Distt. - 577 430

59.

State Bank of Mysore,

Old Bus Stand Complex,

Shiralakoppa, Soraba Taluk,

Shimoga Distt. - 577 428

60.

State Bank of Mysore,

Plot No. 109 & 110,

Rajajinagar, Sattur,

Dharwad - 580 009

61.

State Bank of Mysore,

79/A, 12/SP Municipal No.10920,

Ward No. 14,

Gunjan Complex,

Saptapur, Dharwad - 580 001

62.

State Bank of Mysore,

CTS No. 1986, 1987, & 1988,

Near New English School,

Bommapur Oni, P B Road,

Hubli - 580 028

63.

State Bank of Mysore,

Davangere University Campus,

Shivagangotri, Tolahunse,

Davangere

64.

State Bank of Mysore,

APMC Complex,

Near Bus Stand, Savanur,

Haveri

65.

State Bank of Mysore,

Kundagol Branch,

Dharwad Shettar Oni,

Kundagol - 581 113

Dharwad District

66.

State Bank of Mysore,

Mitra Layout,

Medehalli Road, Chitradurga

67.

State Bank of Mysore,

# 1946/C3 , Duggavathi Arcade,

Harihara Road, Near LIC of India,

Davangere

68.

State Bank of Mysore,

Plot No. 109 & 110, Rajajinagar,

Sattur, Dharwae, Distt. Dharwad

69.

State Bank of Mysore,

Anugraha, B.H. Road,

Vidyanagar, Shivamogga,

Shivamogga

70.

State Bank of Mysore,

Guddada Arekere, Sagara Road,

Shimoga, Shimoga, Shimoga

71.

State Bank of Mysore,

TPC 853 D/D1/D2,

P. D. Shetter Complex,

Near KSRTC Bus Stand,

Hirekerur

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6161

72.

State Bank of Mysore,

Navalgund Branch,

Ganesh Complex,

Near Bus Stand,

Navalgund - 582 208,

Dharwad District.

73.

State Bank of Mysore,

CTS No 1986, 1987, 1988,

Opp: New English School,

Bammapur Oni, P R Road, Hubli

74.

State Bank of Mysore,

Shirahatti Branch, Burbure

Building, Chubbi Road,

Near Bus Stand,

Shirahatti - 582 120,

Gadag District

75.

State Bank of Mysore,

Gujamagadi 582 102 Ron Taluk,

Gujamagadi Village, Gadag

76.

State Bank of Mysore,

C.T.S. No.3133,

Mullanbhavi Cross,

Gadag Main Road, Ron, Gadag

77.

State Bank of Mysore,

Gowramma Maharajpet Building,

Old SBI Building,

Near New Bus Stand,

Hangal

78.

State Bank of Mysore,

PB No. 3 S.V.P Colony,

Sagar Taluk, Jogfalls,

Near Shivmoga

79.

State Bank of Mysore,

Talguppa, Shimoga

80.

State Bank of Mysore,

Mundargi Branch,

Dr. Y.s. Meti Building,

Opp. J.A. College,

Main Road, Mundargi - 582118

Gadag District.

81.

State Bank of Mysore,

PB No. 1 B H Road Nidige PO,

Shimoga Dist, Malavagoppa,

Harige

82.

State Bank of Mysore,

Plot No. 2, R S No. 10 Block No. 2,

Chikkenkoppa,

Sri Channaveer Andhara,

Kalyan Ashram Complex, Main

Road,Navanagar, Hubli

83.

State Bank of Mysore,

Near A P M C,

Hubli-Karwar Road,

Kalaghatgi, Kalaghatgi Gadag

84.

State Bank of Mysore,

CST No. 2115/2116 ,

TMC Road, Market, Nargund

85.

State Bank of Mysore,

Shiggaon Branch,

Raikar Building,

Near Old Bus Stand,

Shiggaon - 581 205,

Haveri District.

86.

State Bank of Mysore,

Hebbasur Branch,

No. 122, Brahmin Street,

Hebbasur Village,

Pin 571 342,

Chamarajanagar Taluk,

Chamrajanagar Dist

87.

State Bank of Mysore,

Hoogya Branch,

No. 502, Minyam Main Road,

Hoogya Village,

Pin 571 444, Kollegal Taluk,

Chamrajanagar Dist

88.

State Bank of Mysore,

Honganur Branch

1/6, Brahmin Street, Honague

Taluk -Chamrajanagar Distt.

89.

State Bank of Mysore,

Doddinduvadi Branch,

No. 1489,

Govt. High School Road,

Doddinduvadi Village,

Pin -571 443, Kollegal Taluk,

Chamrajanagar

90.

State Bank of Mysore,

Yergamballi Branch,

No 907/1, New Extension,

Mandal Panchayat Road,

Yergamballi-571 441

Yelandur Taluk,

Chamrajanagar Dist

91.

State Bank of Mysore,

Shagya Branch, Garden House,

Thomiyar Palyam Road,

Shagya Village - 571 440

Kollegal Taluk,

Chamrajanagar Dist

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6162

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

92.

State Bank of Mysore,

Tellanur Branch,

No. 30 Maramma Street,

Tellanur -571440

93.

State Bank of Mysore,

Ambale Branch,

No. 107, S C Street,

Ambale Village,

Pin-571 441, Yelandur Taluk,

Chamrajanagar Dist

94.

State Bank of Mysore,

Haridarshan Arcade Gonikoppal,

Main Road, Virajpet TQ,

Kodagu Dist Gonikoppal-571213

95.

State Bank of Mysore,

Mahanandi Complex,

P H Road, Bettadapura,

Periyapatna Taluk, Bettadapura

96.

State Bank of Mysore,

Halagur Branch,

688/1, 686/1A,

Devagiri, Channapatna Road,

1st Cross, Halagur - 571 421

Malavalli Taluk

97.

State Bank of Mysore,

Bellur Cross Branch,

338, Setty Complex,

Yeladalli Road, B G Nagar Post,

Bellur Hobli -571418

Nagamangala Taluk

98.

State Bank of Mysore,

Mysore Medical College Branch,

Medical College Building,

Railway Station Road,

Mysore - 570 001.

99.

Andhra Bank,

Kothapet Branch,

Sooravaram Road, Tuni- 533

401 East Godavari Dist.

Andhra Pradesh

100.

Andhra Bank,

Barnala Branch, Brice Plaza,

KC Road, Barnala,

Punjab- 148101

101.

Andhra Bank,

Nabha Branch Circular Road,

Bouran Gate Nabha- 147201

102.

Andhra Bank,

Sangarur Branch,

Shahid Bhagat Singh Chowk,

Sangarur, Punjab-148001

103.

Andhra Bank,

Gundampalli Branch,

Dilawarpur Mandal,

Adilabad Dist.,

Andhra Pradesh – 504306

104.

Andhra Bank,

Boath Branch,

Govt. Junior College Road Boath

Adilabad Dist.

Andhra Pradesh 504305

105.

Andhra Bank,

Kothakonda Branch,

Main Road Bheemadevarapalli

Mandal, Karimnagar Dist.

Andhra Pradesh – 505471

106.

Andhra Bank,

Kukunoor Branch,

H.No.7-91/1 Main Road,

Kukunoor, Khammam Dist.

Andhra Pradesh- 507114

107.

Andhra Bank,

Bhopal Branch

No. 36, Bhadbhada Road,

Bhopal,

Madhya Pradesh - 462063

108.

Andhra Bank,

Lucknow Branch

16, Vidhan Sabha Marg,

Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh - 226018

109.

Andhra Bank,

Allahabad Branch,

P.B. No. 99 92, Johnson Gunj,

158, Pandariba, Allahabad,

Uttar Pradesh – 211003

110.

Andhra Bank,

Gita Vatika Branch,

Mechanical Workshop,

N.E.Railway, Gorakhpur.

Uttar Pradesh – 273012.

111.

Andhra Bank,

R.K. Nagar Branch,

H. No. 111/155, Plot No. 5,

Near Kanika Hospital,

Harsh Nagar,

Kanpur. U.P. – 208012

112.

Andhra Bank,

Kacheri Branch,

Civil Court Premises, Gorakhpur,

Uttar Pradesh – 273001

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6163

113.

Andhra Bank

Ashoka Garden Branch

Pryaas Bhavan, Jail Road,

Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh

114.

Andhra Bank

Ayodhya Nagar Branch 49,

Junior MIG Ayodhya Nagar,

Bhopal.

Madhya Pradesh - 462041

115.

Andhra Bank

Indira Nagar Branch, Sector 9,

Indira Nagar, Lucknow,

Uttar Pradesh - 226016

116.

Andhra Bank

Taramandal Branch

Gorakhpur Development

Authority,

Ramgarh Taal, Deoria Bypass,

Gorakhpur Uttar Pradesh

117.

Andhra Bank

Alam Bagh Branch

KSM 0WER, CP-1 Cinderdump,

Alam Bagh, Lucknow,

Uttar Pradesh - 226004

118.

Andhra Bank

Civil Lines Branch,

Parinay Kunj, 1/174 Civil Lines,

Bagh Farzana Road,

Agra, Uttar Pradesh - 282002

119.

Andhra Bank

Aligarh Branch 4/1399,

Azad Market,

Jamia Urdu Medical Road,

Civil Lines, Aligarh,

Uttar Pradesh - 202002

120.

Andhra Bank

Bulandshahr Branch

235 Civil Lines, Kala Aam,

Bulandshahr, Newdel

Uttar Pradesh - 203001

121.

Andhra Bank

Bareilly Branch 35 A/8 Rampur

Garden, Bareilly, Uttar

Pradesh - 243001

122.

Andhra Bank

Mathura Branch

1947/1 and A Kalindi Kunj,

Dampier Nagar, Station Road,

Mathura, Uttar Pradesh - 281001.

123.

Andhra Bank

Saharanpur Branch

3/6783 Link Road,

Opp Hero Honda Agency,

Saharanpur,

Uttar Pradesh - 247001

124.

Andhra Bank

Muzaffarnagar Branch

313/1 South Bhopa Road,

Muzaffarnagar,

Uttar Pradesh - 251001

125.

Andhra Bank

Murwara Branch

Plot No 31, 58, 86 & 87/2,

Jai Dayal Road, Subash Chowk,

Murwara (Katni)

Madhya Pradesh. Pin

126.

Andhra Bank

Mishrikh Branch

Nahar Chouraha, Sitapur Road,

Mishrikh, Uttar Pradesh. - 261401

127.

Andhra Bank

Sahjanwa Branch ,

Old Mangal Bazar,

Sahjanwa, Gorakhpur

Uttar Pradesh - 273209

128.

Andhra Bank

Atrauli Branch, College Road,

Near Govardhan Dham,

Atrauli, Aligarh,

Uttar Pradesh - 202280

129.

Andhra Bank

Khalilabad Branch

Gola Bazar, Main Market,

Sant Kabir Nagar, Khalilabad,

Uttar Pradesh - 272175

130.

Andhra Bank

Mussori Branch

Mawana Road, Mussori,

Meerut, Uttar Pradesh - 250001

131.

Andhra Bank

Barabanki Branch,

Verma Market East End,

Faizabad Road, Barabanki,

Uttar Pradesh - 225001

132.

Andhra Bank

Sitapur Branch,

M M Mehrotra Bhawan,

13 B Station Road, Sitapur,

Uttar Pradesh.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6164

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

133.

Andhra Bank

Deoria Branch

Plot No 328,

Kotwali Road, Deoria,

Uttar Pradesh - 274001

134.

Andhra Bank

Medrapar Branch

Medrapar Village,

Bakhira Post, Baghauli Block,

Sant Kabir Nagar,

Uttar Pradesh - 272159

135.

Andhra Bank

Vrindavan Branch

225 Raman Reti, Shriji Palace,

Vrindavan,

Uttar Pradesh – 281121

136.

Andhra Bank

Gomti Nagar Branch

Gomti Nagar II, Vinay Khand,

Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh - 226010

137.

Andhra Bank

Dhanupura Branch

Village Lodhipur, Rajput,

Delhi Rd, Dhanupura,

Dist. Moradabad,

Uttar Pradesh- 244102

138.

Andhra Bank

Bijnor Branch

Shyam Vihar,

Kiratpur Road, Bijnor,

Lucknow,

Uttar Pradesh - 226701.

139.

Andhra Bank

Pallavpuram Branch

C-3/1. Pocket-T,

Pallavpuram- Pahse-II,

Meerut, Uttar Pradesh - 250110

140.

Andhra Bank

Aung Branch

Village & PO Aung,

G T Road, Dist Fatehpur,

Uttar Pradesh - 212665

141.

Andhra Bank

Vijanagar Branch

UG-18, 19 & 20,

Ground Floor,

Mangal Plot No A-1PU-4,

Commercial Scheme,

AB Road, Vijay Nagar, Indore,

Madhya Pradesh - 452001

142.

Andhra Bank

Vikas Nagar Branch

CP-1, P G 0WER,

Kurshi Road, Vikas Nagar,

Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh - 226010

143.

Andhra Bank

Delhi Road Branch

Gandhi Complex, Delhi Road,

Moradabad,

Uttar Pradesh - 244001

144.

Andhra Bank

Jhansi Branch

372/44-45, Gwalior Road,

Civil Lines,

Jhansi, UP-284001

145.

Andhra Bank

Etawah Branch

759-C, Harsh Nagar,

Kachehri Road, Etawah,

UP-206001

146.

Andhra Bank

Gonda Branch H. No. 45,

Guddumal Circle,

Malviya Nagar, Gonda,

UP 271001

147.

Akbara, 3051

Indian Overseas Bank

Vll. Akbara, Post: Artoni,

Tehsil - Kirawali,

Distt. Agra - 282007 (UP)

148.

Etah, 2997

Indian Overseas Bank

Hotel Shikhar, Agra Road,

Near New Bus Stand,

Etah - 207001(UP)

149. Firozabad, 3011

Indian Overseas Bank

In front of Main Post Office,

Avas Vikas Colony,

Suhag Nagar,

Firozabad – 280201

150. Major Corporate Indian Overseas Bank

Branch, 2745

Major Corporate Branch,

Forth Floor,

Rachna Cinema Building,

2 Rajendra Place,

Pusa Road, New Delhi- 110008

151. Mid Corporate

Indian Overseas Bank

Branch, 2746

Major Corporate Branch,

Forth Floor,

Rachna Cinema Building,

2 Rajendra Place,

Pusa Road, New Delhi- 110008

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6165

152. Jungpura, 2792

Indian Overseas Bank

115, Masjid Road,

Jungpura, New Delhi- 110014

153. Kirtinagar, 2964

Indian Overseas Bank

1-107 A, Ground Floor,

Kirtinagar, New Delhi- 110015

154. Sector -11

Indian Overseas Bank,

Rohini, 3248

Titiksha Public School,

Sector -11 Rohini,

New Delhi- 110085

155. Badarpur, 3249

Indian Overseas Bank,

416, Near Tuglakabad Metro

Station,

Mathura Road, Badarpur,

New Delhi- 110044

156. Ajmer, 476

Indian Overseas Bank

R.C. Diocesan Society of Ajmer

Kesarganj,

Ajmer, Pin : 305001

Dist. Ajmer

157. Alwar, 385

Indian Overseas Bank

UGF DREAMS, Opp. Govt.

Children Hospital,

Near Old Power House Road,

Gourav Path, Alwar City,

Pin : 301001 Dist. Alwar

158. Alwar Gate

Indian Overseas Bank

Ajmer, 1668

Nasirabad Road, Alwar Gate,

Ajmer, Pin : 305001 Dist. Ajmer

159. Bombay Circle,

Indian Overseas Bank

Jodhpur, 1871

Showroom No.3,

Ranveer Bhawan,

9th Chopasani Road,

Jodhpur, Pin : 342001

160. Bani Park, 562

Indian Overseas Bank

A/C-2, Jaisingh Circle,

Near Collectorate, Bani Park,

Jaipur, Pin : 302006 Dist. Jaipur

161. Bhilwara, 1487

Indian Overseas Bank

No.1-5 Akar Towers,

Old RTO Road, Bhilwara

Pin : 311001 Dist. Bhilwara

162. Bikaner, 1608

Indian Overseas Bank

8 Pokar Quarters, Chaupra Katla,

Rani Bazar, Bikaner, Pin : 334001

Dist : Bikaner

163. Bhiwadi, 2166

Indian Overseas Bank

Plot No.3 A/7, UIT Colony,

Gaurav Path, Bhiwadi

164. C-Scheme, 2137

Indian Overseas Bank

J-54-C SUNRISE,

Prithviraj Road,

C-Scheme, Jaipur, Pin - 302001

Dist. Jaipur

165. Deoli, 2371

Indian Overseas Bank

Plot No. 1, Prem Kunj,

Behind Peer Baba Patel Nagar,

Deoli, Pin : 304804 Dist. Tonk

166. Fatehpur, 1404

Indian Overseas Bank

17 Parihar Shopping Centre,

Sikariya Chauraha, Shehawati,

Fatehpur, Pin : 332301

Dist. Sikar

167. M.I. Road,

Indian Overseas Bank

Jaipur, 158

11 Rituraj Building,

M.I. Road,

Jaipur, Pin : 302001

Dist. Jaipur

168. Jodhpur, 901

Indian Overseas Bank

Plot No. 1, Sunshine Building,

(I Floor), Nai Sarak,

Jodhpur Pin : 242001

Dist. Jodhpur

169. Kishangarh,

Indian Overseas Bank

1909

Plot No. D - 108 (A-2),

NH - 8, Kishangarh,

Pin : 305801 Dist. Ajmer

170. Kota, 1471

Indian Overseas Bank

15 Vallab Nagar,

Rawat Vata Road,

Kota, Pin : 327004 Dist. Kota

171. Karauli, 2228

Indian Overseas Bank

Ajay Niwas, Gulab Bagh,

Karauli, Pin : 322241

Dist. Karauli

172. Khetri Nagar,

Indian Overseas Bank

2173

Central School Campus No.1,

Khetri Nagar,

Jhunjhunu, Pin : 333504

Dist. Jhunjhunu

173. Kolihan Nagar,

Indian Overseas Bank

481

C-17 Kolihan Nagar,

Khetri Pin : 333503

Dist. Jhunjhunu

174. Malviya Nagar,

Indian Overseas Bank

1549

D-672 Malviya Nagar,

Jaipur, Pin : 302017

Dist. Jaipur

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6166

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

175. Mansarovar,

Indian Overseas Bank

1622

IIRM Campus, Tagore Marg,

Sector 11, Agarwal Farm,

Mansarovar, Jaipur

Pin : 302020 Dist. Jaipur

176. Mubarakpur, 653 Indian Overseas Bank

Near Bus Stand,

Kishangarh Road,

Vill & Post Mubarakpur,

Pin : 301025 Dist. Alwar

177. Rajendra Nagar,

Indian Overseas Bank

2174

C/O Adarsh Vidhya Mandir

School, Rajendra Nagar,

Alwar, Pin : 301001 Dist. Alwar

178. Roopbas, 3100

Indian Overseas Bank

S 42 - 45 Vanasthali Mod P O,

Niwai Taluk Industrial Area,

11 D Center Village Roopbas,

Pin : 304022 Dist. Tonk

179. Sikar Road, 1693 Indian Overseas Bank

Sri Bhawani Niketan College

Campus, Sikar Road,

Jaipur, Pin : 302023 Dist. Jaipur

180. Sitapura, 1926

Indian Overseas Bank

G-89 EPIP, RIICO Industrial Area,

Sitapura, Jaipur, Pin : 302022

181. Sriganganagar,

Indian Overseas Bank

1917

5 - A - 8 Meera Marg,

Jawahar Nagar,

Sriganganagar, Pin : 335001

Dist. Ganganagar

182. Tilak Nagar, 381

Indian Overseas Bank

4 Shopping Centre,

Tilak Nagar Market,

Tilak Nagar, Jaipur, Pin : 302004

Dist. Jaipur

183. Udaipur, 645

Indian Overseas Bank

10 Panchasheel Marg, (Opp

Town Hall), I Floor, Udaipur, Pin :

313001 Dist. Udaipur

184. Vaishali Nagar,

Indian Overseas Bank

1539

“F - Block” Plot No. S.R. 3-A,

Near Community Centre,

Amrapali Marg, Vaishali Nagar,

Jaipur, Pin : 302021 Dist. Jaipur

185. ARM Jaipur,

Indian Overseas Bank

2576

Regional Office, Jaipur,

First Floor, Ridhi Tower,

SB-57, Bapu Nagar,

Tonk Road, Jaipur, Pin : 302015

186. Manchwa, 3223

Indian Overseas Bank

Village Manchwa,

Main Kalwar Road,

Near Panchayat Samiti,

Tehsil Jhotwara,

Jaipur, Pin : 302012

187. Asset Recovery Indian Overseas Bank

Management,

Avanbai Mansion,

2594

Vidhan Sabha Marg,

Lucknow- 226001, U.P.

188. Bahraich, 2675

Indian Overseas Bank

Civil Lines, Opp Sneh Utsav,

Near Indira Stadium,

Dist- Bahraich- 271801, U.P,

189. Gonda, 2676

Indian Overseas Bank

H.No. 331, Mohalla

Chhedipurva, Bargaon Police

Chouki, Bahraich Road,

Dist- Gonda, U.P., Pin- 271002

190. Kannauj, 2978

Indian Overseas Bank

7 Sarai Bahadur,

Dist.- Kannauj, U.P., Pin- 209725

191. Fatehpur, 2990

Indian Overseas Bank

176/ 154 C, Krishna Tower,

Collector Ganj,

DIst.- Fatehpur- 212601, U.P.

192. Govind Nagar,

Indian Overseas Bank

3022

126/ F-1, Govind Nagar,

Dist.- Kanpur Dehat,

U.P., Pin- 208006

193. Kidwai Nagar,

Indian Overseas Bank

3024

133/34 “O” Block, Kidwai Nagar,

Dist.- Kanpur Dehat,

U.P., Pin- 208023

194. Mahanagar, 3025 Indian Overseas Bank

B-67, Sector- C, Mahanagar,

Lucknow- 226006, U.P.

195. Rapid Retail

Indian Overseas Bank

Centre, 3056

Navchetna Kendra,

10 Ashok Marg,

Lucknow- 226 001, U.P.

196. Bhuye Mau,

Indian Overseas Bank

3071

Vill. & P.O.- Bhuye Mau,

Mazra Muliha Mau,

Dist.- Rae Bareli- 229001, U.P.

197. Ahma Mau, 3072 Indian Overseas Bank

Opp. Prithvi Guest House,

Sultanpur Road, Ahma Mau,

Lucknow- 226001, U.P.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6167

198. Sidhauli, 3195

Indian Overseas Bank

Teacher Coloney, Bagadurpur,

Opp. Gandhi Vidyalay- Inter

College, Sidhauli- 261303,

Dist.- Sitapur, U.P.

199. Banthra, 3232

Indian Overseas Bank

Rajput Nursing Home,

Opp. Banthra Thana,

Banthra Sikandarpur- 227101

Dist.- Lucknow, U.P.

200. Arya Samaj

Indian Overseas Bank

Road, 3001

D.A.V. Inter College Building,

First Floor, Arya Samaj Road,

Mujjafarnagar, Pin-251001, U.P.

201. R.G.M. Inter

Indian Overseas Bank

College, 2803

R.G.M. Inter College,

Chhipi Tank, Meerut,

Pin-251001, U.P.

202. Shahajahapur,

Indian Overseas Bank

2801

Gatuka Lodge,

Govind Ganj Branch,

Distt- Shahajahapur,

Pin- 242001, U.P.

203. Bijnaur, 3002

Indian Overseas Bank

Bhutal, Civil Lines 11,

Infront of Numaish Ground,

Distt- Bijnaur, Pin- 246701, U.P.

204. Saharanpur, 2981 Indian Overseas Bank SME

Branch, A- 8, Aavas Vikas, Delhi

Road, Saharanpur, Pin- 247001,

U.P.

205.Amroha, 2980

Indian Overseas Bank Bhutal,

Pakka bhag,

Bijnaur Road, Jyotiba,

Fulenagar, Amroha,

Pin- 244221, U.P.

206. Pilibheet

Indian Overseas Bank

Branch, 2802

Pilibheet branch,

94- Ashok Colony,

Civil Lines, South Pilibheet,

Pin- 262001, U.P.

207. Chandausi

Indian Overseas Bank

Branch, 2800

Chandausi Branch,

2- Saket Colony, Chandausi,

Pin- 202412, U.P.

208. Fatuha, 2761

Indian Overseas Bank

Main Road, Near Gas Godown,

Dariyapur, Nayatola, Fatuha,

Dist Patna, Pin code: 803201

209. Neora, 3062

Indian Overseas Bank

Surendra Medical College and

Hospital, Near Shivala More,

Dist Patna, Pin Code – 801113

210. Kanti, 2760

Indian Overseas Bank

Shankar Market, Kanti Chowk,

Near Post Office, Muzaffarpur,

Pin Code – 843109

211. Motihari, 2851

Indian Overseas Bank

2nd floor Sharan Complex,

Town hall, Motihari,

Dist East Champaran,

Pin code – 845401

212. Dullipatti, 3206

Indian Overseas Bank

Vill. & Post Dullipatti,

PS Jainagar, District Madhubani,

Pin Code – 847226

213. Mohanabariam,

Indian Overseas Bank

3207

Vill Mohanbariam,

Post Kanhouli, via-Sakri,

Dist Madhubani,

Pin Code – 847239

214. Nawada, 2865

Indian Overseas Bank

1st Floor Gayatri Devi Bhavan

Old Bus Stand,

Gaya Road Par Nawada,

Pin code – 805110

215. Kishanganj, 2913 Indian Overseas Bank

Shabnam Market Paschimpali

Chowk, Kishanganj

Pin code – 855108

216. Sasaram, 3167

Indian Overseas Bank

Shree Balaji Complex,

G.T. Road, Dist: Rohtas,

Sasaram Pin Code – 821115

217. Bettiah, 3168

Indian Overseas Bank Maruti

Maker Building, Supriya Road,

Bettiah, Dist West Champaran,

Pin code – 845438

218. C.B.O, 3012

Indian Overseas Bank

City Back Office,

401 Adharshila Complex,

South Gandhi Maidan,

Patna, Dist Patna,

Pin code - 800001

219. RRC, 3013

Indian Overseas Bank

Rapid Retail Center,

401 Adharshila Complex,

South Gandhi Maidan,

Patna, Dist Patna,

Pin code - 800001

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6168

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

NCR Delhi Region

220. Sainik Colony,

Indian Overseas Bank

3349

SCF 66 Sainik Colony,

Sector-49,

Commercial Market,

Opp DAV School,

Faridabad-121001

221. Sector-8,

Indian Overseas Bank

Faridabad, 3376

SCF. 203, Sector-8,

Huda Market, Faridabad

222. Rapid Retail

Indian Overseas Bank

Centre,

First Floor Yadav Bhavan,

Gurgaon, 3343

Old Railway Road,

Gurgaon-122001

223. Sector-5,

Indian Overseas Bank

Gurgaon, 3374

Shop.No. 2,

Near Sheetla Associates,

Sheetla Mata Mandir Road,

Opp Sec-5, Gurgaon

224. Chhajarsi, 3178

Indian Overseas Bank

CH Block Village, Chhajarsi,

Opposite Sector 63,

Noida-201307

225. Sharfabad,

Indian Overseas Bank

Noida, 3315

Sector-73 Lakshmi Complex,

Sharfabad, Noida-201301

226. Jalpura-

Indian Overseas Bank

Haldoni, 3364

Khasara No. 689,

Chaudhary Bibari Singh Market,

Jalpura Haldoni Mod,

Post Kuleshra-201306

227. Sector-22,

Indian Overseas Bank

Noida, 3375

Opp J-55, Village Chaura

Sector-22, Noida-201301

Dehradun Region

228. Rishikesh, 1458

Indian Overseas Bank

Omkarananda Bhawan

Muni Ki Reshikesh

Pin : 249201 Dist : Tehri Garhwal

229. Haldwani, 1467

Indian Overseas Bank

Hotel Kanta,

Kanta Complex Mangal

Parao Bareilly Road, Haldwani,

Pin : 263139 Dist : Nainital

230. Nehru Colony,

Indian Overseas Bank

1489

160 Haridwar Road,

Nehru Colony, Dehradun

Pin : 248001 Dist : Dehradun

231. Rudrapur, 1591

Indian Overseas Bank

I Floor SGAD Shopping Complex

Nainital Road, PIN : 263153

Dist : Udham Singh Nagar

232. Haridwar, 1692

Indian Overseas Bank

Near Shanti Kunj, Bhupatwala,

(Uttarakhand) Haridwar

Pin : 249410 Dist : Haridwar

233. Patel Nagar, 2383 Indian Overseas Bank

32 Co-operative Industrial Area

Patel Nagar, Dehradun

PIN : 248002 Dist : Dehradun

234. Kotdwar, 2543

Indian Overseas Bank

Near Maheswari Automobiles

Najibabad Road, Kotdwar

PIN : 246149 Dist : Garhwal

235. Dhandera, 2544

Indian Overseas Bank

P O & Vill Dhandera

Pin : 247667, Dist : Haridwar,

P O & Vill. Dhandera

Pin : 247667 Dist : Haridwar

236. Nainital, 2804

Indian Overseas Bank

111-112 M/s Gangolas Chemist’s

Talli Tal Nainital PIN : 263002

Dist : Nainital

237. Bageshwar, 2900 Indian Overseas Bank

Tehsil Road Bageshwar

PIN : 263642

Dist : Bageshwar

238. Specialized

Indian Overseas Bank

SME, Shivalik

D-17 Shivalik Nagar, Phase I,

Nagar, 2901

BHEL Elysium Guest House,

Ranipur Haridwar

PIN : 249403 Dist : Haridwar

239. Bharuwala

Indian Overseas Bank

Grant, 3113

Village Bharuwala Grant

P O Clement Town,

Dehradun TK

PIN : 248002

Dist : Dehradun

240. Bahadarpur

Indian Overseas Bank

Jat, 3211

Village: Bahadurpur Jat

Block Bahadrabad

PIN : 249404

Dist : Haridwar

241. Sarai, 3212

Indian Overseas Bank

Village Sarai

Block Bahadrabad

PIN : 249404

Dist : Haridwar

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6169

242. Malsi, 3213

Indian Overseas Bank

Village Malsi

Block Sahaspur

PIN : 248003

Dist : Dehradun

243. Nathan Pur, 3214 Indian Overseas Bank

Village Nathan Pur

Post Office Nehru Gram

Block Raipur

PIN : 248010

Dist : Dehradun

244. Motharo

Indian Overseas Bank

Wala, 3215

Village Motherowala

Block Raipur

Teh: Pachchua Doon

PIN : 248115

Dist : Dehradun

245. Dehradun

Indian Overseas Bank

Regional

595 Indira Nagar, Malik Chowk,

Office, 2952

Dehradun Pin : 248006

Uttaranchal

Bhopal Region

246. Dimni, 2536

Indian Overseas Bank

H. No. 67, Nagara Baba Road,

Post-Dimni, Tehsil - Amba,

District - Morena – 476134

247. Rairu, 2533

Indian Overseas Bank

11 & 11, Ramji Market,

Kulaith Road,

Near Milawali Railway Station,

Rairu, Dist.

Gwalior-474 010

248. Indore Mid

Indian Overseas Bank

Corporate, 2639

Scheme No.54,

Shree Satya Sai Vidya Vihar

Compound,

Bombay Hospital Road,

Vijay Nagar, Indore - 452 010

249. Datia, 2640

Indian Overseas Bank

H. No. 99/2,

In front of Nagar Palika Bhawan,

Datia - 475 661

250. Gwalior -

Indian Overseas Bank

Thatipur, 2655

H. No. 88, Mayur,

Saket, Thatipur - 474 011,

Distt. Gwalior

251. Bhind, 2656

Indian Overseas Bank

H. No. 363, Ward No.12,

Gwalior Main Road,

Bhind - 477 001, Distt.Bhind

252. Rewa, 2872

Indian Overseas Bank

NH-7, Near Bus Stand,

beside Aditya Hotel,

Rewa - 486 001

253. Balaghat, 2873

Indian Overseas Bank

Ward No.15,

Main Road, Balaghat - 481 001,

Distt. Balaghat

254. Chattarpur, 2954 Indian Overseas Bank

Plot No. 243, 24 Jawahar Marg,

Chattarpur - 471 001,

Distt. Chattarpur

255. Guna, 2956

Indian Overseas Bank

Plot No. 96, Main Road,

Guna - 473 001, Distt. Guna

256. Jauri, 2958

Indian Overseas Bank

In front of Beej Bhandar,

Jaura Road, Jauri - 476 001,

Distt. Morena

257. Mandsaur, 2957

Indian Overseas Bank

65/1, DRP Line,

Mau Neemach Road,

Mandsaur - 458 001

258. Neemach, 2936

Indian Overseas Bank

20, Scheme No.1,

Town Hall Road,

Neemach - 458441,

Dist. Neemach

259. Purani Chawni,

Indian Overseas Bank

2953

Survey No.882,

Near Tata Mobile Tower,

Purani Chawni - 474 101,

Dist. Gwalior

260. Seoni, 2959

Indian Overseas Bank

436, Near Mahavir Madhiya,

GN Road, Mangalipeth,

Ajad Ward, Seoni - 480 661,

Dist. Seoni

261. Purasani, 3132

Indian Overseas Bank

H. No. 3733, A Block,

Sithauli Road,

Near Railway Station,

In front of Railway Spring

Factory, Vill. Purasani,

Post - ITM College - 474001,

Dist. Gwalior

262. Nainod, 3131

Indian Overseas Bank

Plot No.139, Gandhinagar,

Vill. Nainod - 453112,

Dist. Indore

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6170

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

263. Bhawrasala, 3130 Indian Overseas Bank

Plot No.40, 41, Shakanbari,

Avenue Colony,

Post. Shri Arbindo S A ,

Vill - 453555, Dist. Indore

264. Pipliya

Indian Overseas Bank

Bajkhan, 3133

Plot No.7 & 8,

Pipaliya Bajkhan Road,

Bhanpur - 462010,

Dist. Bhopal

265. Satna, 3188

Indian Overseas Bank

Khasra No. 252,

Satna Building,

Rewa Road,

Satna - 485 001,

Dist. Satna

266. Virpur, 3189

Indian Overseas Bank

Imali Naka, Virpur, 474 001,

Gwalior

267. Borda, 3209

Indian Overseas Bank

Ultimate English Villa,

Mian Kolar Road,

Vill. Borda - 462042,

Dist. Bhopal

Raipur Region

268. Balod, 2534

Indian Overseas Bank

Near Old Bus Stand,

Sardar Line Balod,

PIN : 491226

Dist : Durg

269. Baikundpur, 2657 Indian Overseas Bank

Plot No 7, Ward No 8,

Main Road Baikunthpur,

PIN : 497335, Dist : Koriya

270. Samta Colony,

Indian Overseas Bank

2984

C-97, Samta Colony,

Raipur, PIN : 492001

Dist : Raipur

271. G E Road,

Indian Overseas Bank

Raipur, 2985

Sai Tower Near Azad Police

Station, Amapara Raipur,

PIN : 492001

Dist : Raipur

272. Hirri 3227

Indian Overseas Bank

At Hirri,

Near Bilha Moae,

PO - Hirri

PIN : 495222

Dist : Bilaspur

273. Ranchi Main,

Indian Overseas Bank

0366

Athmaram Bhavan,

M G Marg,

Radhesyam Lane Ranchi,

Pin : 834001

Dist : Ranchi

274. Jamshedpur,

Indian Overseas Bank

0424

10 Silver Cage Mall (I Floor)

Diagonal Road,

Bistupur Jamshedpur,

Pin : 831001

Dist : Paschimi Singhbhum

275. Bokaro Steel

Indian Overseas Bank

City, 1246

Purana Baz By Pass Road,

Chas PO Bokaro,

Pin : 827013 Dist : Bokaro

276. Dhanbad, 0593

Indian Overseas Bank

Bank More Katras Road,

Dhanbad Pin : 826001

Dist : Dhanbad

277. Bariatu Road,

Indian Overseas Bank

0672

Amrapali Building

Bariatu Road,

R M C H P.O. Ranchi,

Pin : 834008 Dist : Ranchi

278. Club Road, 1563 Indian Overseas Bank

Gossner College Gel Church

Complex, Main Road Ranchi,

Pin : 834001 Dist : Ranchi

279. Purulia

Indian Overseas Bank

Road, 1508

Gram Guru Education Centre,

Purulia Road, Ranchi,

Pin : 834001 Dist : Ranchi

280. Hazaribagh, 1486 Indian Overseas Bank

Remesh Complex,

Boddam Bazar, K.B. Marg,

Hazaribagh,

Pin : 825301

Dist : Hazaribag

281. Dakra, 0558

Indian Overseas Bank

Dakra Colliery,

Khelari P.O.

Dakra, Pin : 829210

Dist : Ranchi

282. Kanke Road,

Indian Overseas Bank

1639

Central Coal Fields,

Lt. Kanke Road,

Jawahar Nagar, Ranchi,

Pin : 834009

Dist : Ranchi

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6171

283. Mango, 1564

Indian Overseas Bank

Madhusudan Devendra Lok

Complex, Dimna Road,

Mango, Jamshedpur,

Pin : 831013

Dist : Purbi Singhbhum

284. Marar, 0454

Indian Overseas Bank

Ranchi Road, Marar,

Pin : 829117

Dist : Ramgarh

285. Baridih, 1511

Indian Overseas Bank

Mercy Hospital Baridih,

Jamshedpur

Pin : 831017

Dist : Purbi Singhbhum

286. Neori, 0783

Indian Overseas Bank

Vikas Vidyalaya Neori

Pin : 835217

Dist : Ranchi

287. Khunti, 1182

Indian Overseas Bank

Upper Chowk

Main Road

Khunti

Pin : 835210

Dist : Khunti

288. Deoghar, 1579

Indian Overseas Bank

I Floor L I C Buildings

Kutchery Road

Deoghar

Pin : 814112

Dist : Deoghar

289. Giridih, 0590

Indian Overseas Bank

Makatpur Bi Marg,

Giridih Pin : 815301

Dist- Giridih

290. Gumla, 1544

Indian Overseas Bank

Sharda Market Complex

Palkot Road,

Gumla Pin : 835207

Dist : Gumla

291. Sec IX, 1839

Indian Overseas Bank

Sector 9 A “B” Road,

Bokaro Steel City

Pin : 827009

Dist : Bokaro

292. Adityapur, 3003

Indian Overseas Bank

Holding No 1839 1st Floor

Tata Kendra, Main Road

Adityapur Pin : 832109

Dist : Saraikela Kharsawa

293. Daltonganj, 3021 Indian Overseas Bank

Suraj Nagar,

Belwatikar Chowk

(Medini Nagar), Daltonganj

P O Daltonganj

Pin : 822101 Dist : Palamau

294. Chakradharpur,

Indian Overseas Bank

3141

Old Ranchi Road

Rani Sati Enclave

Chakradarpur Pin : 833102

Dist : Paschimi Singhbhum

295. Dumardaga, 3152 Indian Overseas Bank

Ground Floor Rajasthali Enclave

P. S Sadar P.O. Neori

Vill - Dumardaga

Pin : 835217 Dist : Ranchi

296. Ormanjhi, 3170

Indian Overseas Bank

Mamta Market,

Thana Ormanjhi

Vill - Dardang (Ormanjhi)

P. O. Ormanjhi

Pin : 835219 Dist : Ranchi

297. Lalganj, 3321

Indian Overseas Bank

Beside Patanjali Arogyam

Khelgaon, P O - Sugnu

Lalganj

Pin : 835103 Dist : Ranchi

298. Allahabad, 0350

Indian Overseas Bank

61, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines,

Allahabad,

Pin-211001,

Distt : Allahabad

299. Varanasi, 0370

Indian Overseas Bank

C7-34, Lahurabir Main Crossing,

Varanasi, Pin-221001,

Distt : Varanasi

300. Gorakhpur, 0452

Indian Overseas Bank

Vijaya Chowk, Gorakhpur,

Pin : 273001,

Distt : Gorakhpur

301. Phulpur

Indian Overseas Bank

(Iffco Compex),

Ghiya Nagar, Allahabad,

0595

Jaunpur Road, Phulpur,

Pin : 212404,

Distt : Allahabad

302. Varanasi

Indian Overseas Bank

Cantonment,

52 & 53 Patel Nagar Colony,

1002

Near Mint House, Nadeshar,

Varanasi Cantonment,

Pin: 221002, Distt: Varanasi

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6172

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

303. Manauri, 1523

Indian Overseas Bank

G T Road,

Off Airforce Station Gate,

Opp. Gurudwara, Manauri,

Pin : 212208, Allahabad

304. Azamagarh, 1604 Indian Overseas Bank

Rama Complex,

Pandit Deen Dayal Chowk,

Civil Line, Azamgarh,

Pin : 276001,

Distt : Allahabad

305. Mirzapur, 1618

Indian Overseas Bank

Brahmchari ka kuan,

Near Reserve Police Line,

VIP Road, Mirzapur,

Pin : 231001,

Distt: Mirzapur

306. Fatima Hospital, Indian Overseas Bank

Gorakhpur,1906

New Bye-Pass Road,

Jungle Saligram,

Padri Bazaar, Gorakhpur,

Pin : 273001,

Distt – Gorakhpur

307. Glenhill School,

Indian Overseas Bank

Varanasi, 1968

Glenhill School, Manduadih,

Pin: 221103, Distt: Varanasi

308. St. Joseph

Indian Overseas Bank

School,

Civil Lines, Gorakhpur

Gorakhpur, 1972

Pin : 273009, Distt: Gorakhpur

309. Bank Road

Indian Overseas Bank

Branch, 2067

72, Bank Road, Gorakhpur,

Uttar Pradesh,

Pin : 273001, Distt : Gorakhpur

310. Barhalganj, 2104 Indian Overseas Bank

Main Market Road,

Barhalganj,

Pin: 273402,

Distt: Gorakhpur

311. Cobra Nursery

Indian Overseas Bank

School,

1, Kariyappa Road,

Allahabad, 2163

New Cantonment,

Sub-Area Headquarters,

Allahabad Pin: 211001

Distt: Allahabad

312. Reserve Police

Indian Overseas Bank

Line, Varanasi,

Reserve Police Line,

2164

Pandeypur Road,

Varanasi Cantonment

Varanasi Pin : 221002

Dist : Varanasi

313. Pratapgarh, 2362 Indian Overseas Bank

Chawla Arcade Bhangwa

Chungi Pratapgarh

Pin : 230001

Dist : Pratapgarh

314. Sultanpur -

Indian Overseas Bank

Civil Lines, 2386 1077/3 Civil Lines

Opp to Bus Stand Sultanpur

Pin : 228001

Dist : Sultanpur

315. Mau Aima, 2471

Indian Overseas Bank

171 Station Road,

Mau Aima,

Allahabad Pin : 212501

Dist : Allahabad

316. Chitrakootdham

Indian Overseas Bank

(Karvi), 2472

440/2 Dwaraka Puri,

Mandakini Road,

Opp Banda Division

Jalsanthan,

Purani Bazar

Pin : 210205

Dist : Chitrakoot

317. Patti, 2511

Indian Overseas Bank

H No 1 Ward No 2

Civil Lines Patti

Pin : 230135

Dist : Pratapgarh

318. Mahewa

Indian Overseas Bank

Patti, 2556

46-B Opp Police Post

Mahewa Chowk, Naini

Allahabad

Pin : 211007

Dist : Allahabad

319. Maharajganj,

Indian Overseas Bank

2557

Plot No 2034,

Ward No 16,

Opp Kotwali Pharenda Rd

Hamid Nagar,

Nagar Palika Parishad

Maharajganj

Pin : 273303

Dist : Maharajganj

320. Chandauli, 2572

Indian Overseas Bank

Plot No 453

Beside Rama Shankar Singh

Hospital,

Chandausli,

Pin : 232104

Dist : Chandauli

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6173

321. Mukhalsarai,

Indian Overseas Bank

2859

House No 581 G T Road

Nai Basti Mughalsarai

Pin : 232101

Dist : Lucknow

322. Ghazipur, 2860

Indian Overseas Bank

136 Saklenabad

Opp Jail Gate

Ghazipur

Pin : 233001

Dist : Ghazipur

323. Bhadohi, 2983

Indian Overseas Bank

102 Station Road,

Mallu Talab Bhadohi

Pin : 221401

Dist : Sant Ravidas Nagar

324. Basti, 3014

Indian Overseas Bank

H No 680-A Prahlad Colony,

Civil Lines Basti

Pin : 272001

Dist : Basti

325. Jaunpur, 3015

Indian Overseas Bank

H No 21-A Prabhu Complex,

Husainabad Jaycee Chauraha,

Jaunpur

Pin : 222001

Dist : Jaunpur

326. Bhikhipur, 3079

Indian Overseas Bank

16 KHA Sharma Towers,

Bhikhipur, P. O. Mirazamurad,

Pin : 221307 Dist : Varanasi

327. Anpara, 3123

Indian Overseas Bank

234/4 Anpara Bazar

Cinema Road

Anpara P O

Pin : 231225

Dist : Sonbhadra

328. Robertsganj,

Indian Overseas Bank

3124

Plot No 337 Devdep Complex,

Near Chandi Tiraha,

Robertsgunj,

Pin : 231216

Dist : Sonbhadra

329. Khalilabad, 3326 Indian Overseas Bank

H No 136

Ward 24 Gola Bazar North

Near Nehru Chowk Khalilabad

Pin : 272175

Dist : Sant Kabir Nagar

(jktLo foHkkx)

(osQUnzh; izR;{k dj cksMZ)

ubZ fnYYkh] 26 vxLr] 2014

(la- 36@2014)

dk-vk-

2434.—loZlk/kj.k dh tkudkjh ds fy,

,rn~}kjk ;g vf/lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd dsUnz ljdkj }kjk vk;dj

fu;ekoyh] 1962 (mDr fu;ekoyh) ds fu;e 5x vkSj 5?k ds

lkFk ifBr vk;dj vf/fu;e] 1961 (mDr vf/fu;e) dh /kjk

3 dh mi&/kjk (1) ds [kaM (iii) ds iz;kstukFkZ chjcy lkguh

baLVhV~;wV vkWiQ isfy;ksckWVuh] y[kumQ] (iSu&,,,Vhch6882,p)

laxBu dks dj fu/kZj.k o"kZ 2014&15 ls vkxs fuEufyf[kr 'krks± ds

v/hu ^oSKkfud vuqla/ku laLFkk* dk;Zdykiksa dh Js.kh esa vuqeksfnr

fd;k x;k gS] uker%µ

(i)

vuqeksfnr ^oSKkfud vuqla/ku laLFkk* dk eq[; mís'; oSKkfud

vuqla/ku djuk gksxk_

(ii) vuqeksfnr laxBu oSKkfud vuqla/ku Lo;a djsxk_

(iii) vuqeksfnr laxBu oSKkfud vuqla/ku ds fy, bldks izkIr

jkf'k ds laca/ esa i`Fkd ys[kk cgh j[ksxk] ftlesa vuqla/ku

djus ds fy, iz;qDr jkf'k n'kkZbZ xbZ gks] mDr vf/fu;e dh

/kjk 288 dh mi&/kjk (2) ds Li"Vhdj.k esa ;Fkk&ifjHkkf"kr

fdlh ys[kkdkj ls vius [kkrk&cgh dh ys[kk&ijh{kk djk,xk

vkSj mDr vf/fu;e dh /kjk 139 dh mi&/kjk (1) ds

varxZr vk; dh fooj.kh izLrqr djus dh fu;e frfFk rd

,sls ys[kkdkj }kjk fof/or lR;kfir ,oa gLrk{kfjr ys[kk

ijh{kk fjiksVZ bl ekeys esa {ks=kkf/dkj j[kus okys vk;dj

vk;qDr vFkok vk;dj funs'kd dks izLrqr djsxk_

(iv) vuqeksfnr laxBu izkIr nku vkSj lkekftd foKku esa vuqlaèkku

ds fy, iz;qDr jkf'k dk vyx fooj.k j[ksxk vkSj mi;qZDr

ys[kk&ijh{kk fjiksVZ ds lkFk ys[kk&ijh{kd }kjk fof/or

lR;kfir ,sls fooj.k dh izfrfyfi izLrqr djsxk A

2-

dsanz ljdkj ;g vuqeksnu okil ys ysxh ;fn vuqeksfnr

laxBu %µ

(d) iSjkxzkiQ 1 ds mi&iSjkxzkiQ (iii) esa mfYyf[kr i`Fkd ys[kk

cgh j[kus esa vliQy jgrk gS_ vFkok

([k) iSjkxzkiQ 1 ds mi&iSjkxzkiQ (iii) esa mfYyf[kr viuh ys[kk&

ijh{kk fjiksVZ izLrqr djus esa vliQy jgrk gS_ vFkok

(x) iSjkxzkiQ 1 ds mi&iSjkxzkiQ (iv) esa mfYyf[kr lkekftd

foKku ,oa lkaf[;dh vuqla/ku ds fy, izkIr ,oa iz;qDr nku

dk viuk fooj.k izLrqr djus esa vliQy jgrk gS_ vFkok

(?k) viuk vuqla/ku dk;Z djuk can dj nsrk gS vFkok blds

vuqla/ku dk;Z dks okLrfod ugha ik;k tkrk gS_ vFkok

(Ä) mDr fu;ekoyh ds fu;e 5x vkSj 5?k ds lkFk ifBr mDr

vf/fu;e dh /kjk 35 dh mi&/kjk (1) ds [kaM (iii) ds

mica/ksa ds vuq:i ugha gksrk vkSj mudk ikyu ugha fd;k

tkrk A

¹iQk- la- 203@30@2013@vkdfu&IIº

Ípk jLrksxh] voj lfpo (vkdfu&II)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6174

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(Department of Revenue)

(Central Board of Direct Taxes)

New Delhi, 26th August, 2014

(No. 36/2014)

S.O.

2434.—It is hereby notified for general

information that the organization Birbal Sahni Institute of

Palaeobotany, Lucknow (PAN-AAATB6882H) has been

approved by the Central Government for the purpose of

clause (iii) of sub-section (1) of section 35 of the Income-

tax Act, 1961 (said Act), read with Rules 5C and 5D of the

Income-tax Rules, 1962 (said Rules), from Assessment year

2014-2015 onwards in the category of ‘Scientific Research

Association’ activities subject to the following conditions,

namely :—

(i)

The sole objective of the approved ‘Scientific

research association’ shall be undertake scientific research;

(ii)

The approved organization shall carry out scientific

research by itself;

(iii)

The approved organization shall maintain separate

books of accounts in respect of the sums received by it for

scientific research, reflect therein the amounts used for

carrying out research, get such books audited by an

accountant as defined in the explanation to sub-section (2)

of section 288 of the said Act and furnish the report of

such audit duly signed and verified by such accountant to

the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-

tax having jurisdiction over the case, by the due date of

furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) of

section 139 of the said Act;

(iv)

The approved organization shall maintain a separate

statement of donations received and amounts applied for

scientific research in social science and a copy of such

statement duly certified by the auditor shall accompany

the report of audit referred to above.

2.

The Central Government shall withdraw the approval

if the approved organization :—

a.

fails to amintain separate books of accounts referred

to in sub-paragraph (iii) of paragraph 1; or

b.

fails to furnish its audit report referred to in sub-

paragraph (iii) of paragraph 1; or

c.

fails to furnish its statement of the donations received

and sums applied for research in social science or

statistical research referred to in sub-paragraph (iv)

of paragraph 1; or

d.

ceases to carry on its research activities or its

research activities are not found to be genuine; or

e.

ceases to conform to and comply with the provisions

of clause (iii) of sub-section (1) of section 35 of the

said Act read with rules 5C and 5D of the said Rules.

[F. No. 203/30/2013/ITA-II]

RICHA RASTOGI, Under Secy. (ITA-II)

ubZ fnYYkh] 3 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk-

2435.—ljdkjh LFkku (vuf/Ñr vf/Hkksfx;ksa

dh csn[kyh) vf/fu;e] 1971 (1971 dk 40) dh /kjk 3 }kjk

iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnzh; ljdkj] ,rn~}kjk]

fuEufyf[kr lkj.kh ds dkye (2) esa mfYyf[kr vf/dkfj;ksa dks

mDr vfèkfu;e ds iz;kstu ds fy, lEink vf/dkjh fu;qDr djrh

gS vkSj vkxs ;g funs'k nsrh gS fd mDr vf/dkjh mDr vf/fu;e

}kjk ;k mlds varxZr lEink vf/dkjh dks iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa vkSj vf/

jksfir drZO;ksa dk v/ksfyf[kr lkj.kh ds dkye (3) esa ;Fkk

fofu£n"V {ks=k ds varxZr vkus okys ljdkjh LFkkuksa ds laca/ esa]

vius {ks=kkf/dkj dh LFkkuh; lhek ds Hkhrj iz;ksx djsaxs %µ

Ø-la- vf/dkjh dk inuke

lkoZtfud ifjljksa dk oxhZ&

dj.k vkSj {ks=kkf/dkj ds

fu;a=k.k dh LFkkuh; lhek

(1)

(2)

(3)

1-

eaMy dk;kZy; gSnjkckn

rsyaxkuk vkSj fleka/jk jkT;

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

esa fLFkr eaMy dk;kZy;]

egkizcU/d]

gSnjkckn ds iz'kklfud

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fu;a=k.k ds v/hu jkT;ksa ds

6&1&73] ydM+h dk iqy]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 23 ftys

lSiQkckn] gSnjkckn&500004

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

iwoZ xksnkojh ftyk

xaVwj

fpÙkwj

gSnjkckn

dMqik

djhe uxj

Ñ".kk

oqQjuwy

egcwcuxj

vuariqj

uyxksUMk

usYyksj

futkekckn

izdkle

jaxk jsîóh

JhdkoqQye

fo'kk[kkiêðue

fot;uxje

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6175

njHkaxk

[kxfj;k

e/siqjk

4-

eaMy dk;kZy;] iVuk

eaMy dk;kZy;] iVuk ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 1 ftyk

vkj CykWd] pk.kD; Vkoj]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

iVuk 842001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

iVuk

5-

eaMy dk;kZy;] vkjk

eaMy dk;kZy;] vkjk ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys

vkjk gksVy fjxy

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

dkEiysDl] f}rh; ry]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

iwohZ jeUuk jksM vkjk

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

(fcgkj)

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

dSewj

Hkkstiqj

cDlj

jksgrkl

6-

eaMy dk;kZy; fcgkj'kjhiQ

eaMy dk;kZy;] fcgkj'kjhiQ ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 8 ftys

jkepUnziqj]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

fcgkj'kjhiQ&803101

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

y[khljk;

ukyank

uoknk

teqbZ

'ks[kiqjk

Hkkxyiqj

eqaxsj

ckadk

okjaxy

if'peh xksnkojh ftyk

esMd

[kEeke

vfnykckn

2- eaMy dk;kZy; eqtÝiQjiqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] eqtÝiQjiqj

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

ds iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds

egkizcU/d]

v/hu ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 9 ftys

vxgksfj;k cktkj

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

eqtÝiQjiqj&842002

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

eqtÝiQjiqj

lhrke<+h

floku

xksikyxat

iwohZ pEikju

if'peh pEikju

lkj.k

oS'kkyh

f'kogj

3- eaMy dk;kZy; njHkaxk

eaMy dk;kZy;] njHkaxk ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 12 ftys

njHkaxk] de£'k;y gkml]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

ygsfj;k ljk;]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

njHkaxk&846001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

e/qcuh

leLrhiqj

csxqljk;

lgjlk

lqikSy

vjfj;k

iq£.k;k

dfVgkj

fd'kuxat

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6176

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

7- eaMy dk;kZy; x;k

eaMy dk;kZy;] x;k ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys

x;k 400 ,ih dkWyksuh]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

x;k&823001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

x;k

vkSjaxkckn

tgkukckn

vjoy

8- eaMy dk;kZy;] jk;iqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] jk;iqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa NÙkhlx<+ jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 27 ftys

enhuk eafty dpsjh

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

pkSd] jk;iqj]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

NÙkhlx<+

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

cLrj

fcykliqj

/erkjh

nqxZ

tatfxj&pEik

dksjck

dksfj;k

egkleqan

jk;x<+

jk;iqj

jktuan xkao

narsokM+k

t'kiqj

do/kZ

ckyksn

ukyksnk cktkj

cyjkeiqj

fcfe=kk

fctkiqj

xfj;kcan

dudsj

dksaMk xkao

eqaxsyh

ujk;.kiqj

ljxqtk

lqdek

lwjtiqj

9-

eaMy dk;kZy;] mÙkjh

eaMy dk;kZy;] mÙkjh fnYyh ds

fnYyh ds ofj"Bre

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

lgk;d egkizcU/d]

ftlesa fnYyh jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys

jktsUnz Hkou] jktsUnz

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

Iysl] ubZ fnYyh

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

iwohZ fnYyh

mÙkj iwoZ fnYyh

mÙkjh fnYyh

mÙkjh if'peh fnYyh

if'peh fnYyh

lSUVªy fnYyh

10- eaMy dk;kZy;] vgenkckn

eaMy dk;kZy;] vgenkckn ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa xqtjkr jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 14 ftys

xqtjkr Hkou] vgenkckn]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

,e ts ykbczsjh ds lkeus]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

,ykbl iqy] vkJe jksM]

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vgenkckn&380006

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

vgenkckn

vejsyh

Hkkouxj

cukldaBk

xka/huxj

tkeuxj

twukx<+

dPN

esglk.kk

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6177

ikVu

iksjcanj

jktdksV

lkcjdaBk

lqjsUnz uxj

eksjch

y{;}hi (la?k 'kkflr)

11- eaMy dk;kZy; p.Mhx<+

eaMy dk;kZy;] paMhx<+ ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa gfj;k.kk jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys

ih,uch gkml]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

lsDVj 17&ch]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

paMhx<+&160017

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

paMhx<+ (la?k 'kkflr)

iapowQyk (gfj;k.kk)

vEckyk (gfj;k.kk)

12- eaMy dk;kZy; fglkj

eaMy dk;kZy;] fglkj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa gfj;k.kk jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys

fglkj] vkbZvkbZVh ds

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

lkeus] Mkcj pkSd]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

fglkj&125005

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

fglkj

fljlk

iQrsgkckn

13- eaMy dk;kZy; djuky

eaMy dk;kZy;] djuky ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa gfj;k.kk jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys

cs&21&22] lsDVj&12]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

gqM~Mk] djuky&132001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

djuky

ikuhir

lksuhir

14- eaMy dk;kZy; jksgrd

eaMy dk;kZy;] jksgrd ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa gfj;k.kk jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 5 ftys

jksgrd] jke xksiky]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

dkyksuh] lksuhir jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

jksgrd&124001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

jksgrd

>Ttj

jsokM+h

egsUnzx<+

fHkokuh

15- eaMy dk;kZy; f'keyk

eaMy dk;kZy;] f'keyk ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa fgekpy izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys

f'keyk fjtsaV gkml]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

fn eky] f'keyk&171001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

dUuwj

f'keyk

fljekSj

lksyu

16- eaMy dk;kZy; /eZ'kkyk

eaMy dk;kZy;] /eZ'kkyk ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa fgekpy izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys

dpgjh jksM] thihvks ds

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

ikl] /eZ'kkyk&176215

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

dkaxM+k

pEck

17- eaMy dk;kZy; gehjiqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] gehjiqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa fgekpy izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys

gehjiqj] U;w jksM]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6178

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

gehjiqj 177001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

gehjiqj

muk

fcykliqj

18- eaMy dk;kZy; e.Mh

eaMy dk;kZy;] e.Mh ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa fgekpy izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys

e.Mh] ty jksM]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

cVkyk pkSd]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

eaMh 175 001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

e.Mh

oqQYyq

dsyk¡x

19- eaMy dk;kZy; tEew

eaMy dk;kZy;] tEew ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa tEew ,oa d'ehj jkT;

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

ds uhps fn, x, orZeku 21

gkbySaM Vkoj]

ftys 'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj

jsy gsM dkEIySDl]

tks iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

tEew 180012

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

tEew

dBqvk

lack

iw¡p

jktkSjh

MksMk

js;klh

jkecu

m/eiqj

Jhuxj

vuarukx

dkjfxy

iqyokek

cMxke

ckjkewyk

oqQiokM+k

ysg

xaMsjcy

ckaMhiksjk

fd'rokj

lksisu

20- eaMy dk;kZy; jkaph

eaMy dk;kZy;] jkaph ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa >kj[kaM jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 24 ftys

cxjk; ekdsZV] esu jksM]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

jk¡ph 834001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

(>kj[kaM)

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

jk¡ph

iwohZ ¯lgHkwe

if'peh ¯lgHkwe

ljk;dsyk

cksdkjks

/uckn

iykew

ykrsgkj

x<+ok

fxjhMhg

gtkjhckx

prjk

yksgjMkxk

xksM~Mk

nso?kj

nqedk

xqeyk

tkerkjk

[kqUrh

dksMjek

ikoqQj

jkex<+

lkgscxat

fleMsxk

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6179

21- eaMy dk;kZy;] caxykSj

eaMy dk;kZy;] caxykSj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa dukZVd jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 30 ftys

26&27] ,eth jksM]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

jgstk VkWoj]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

caxykSj&560001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

cxykSj

jkeuxjk

csyxk¡o

fcnj

chtkiqj

nf{k.k dUuM+

/kM+okM+

nokafxjh

xMkx

xqycxkZ

gklu

dksykj

ekaM;k

eSlwj

mÙkjh dUuM+

f'keksxk

rqeoqQj

mMhih

csYykjh

ckxy dksV

caxykSj xzkeh.k

pejktkuxj

fpdeaxyqj

fpdcYykiqj

fp=knqxkZ

gkosjh

dksMkxw

dksIiy

jk;pwj

;knkfxjh

22- eaMy dk;kZy;] dksftdksM

eaMy dk;kZy;] dksftdksM ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa dsjyk jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys

'krkCnh Hkou] feuh

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

ckbZikl jksM] ihvks]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

,, xkfoUniqje]

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

dksftdksM&673016

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

dUuwj

dlkjxkWM

dksftdksM

ekykiqje

iykDdM

ok;ukM

23- eaMy dk;kZy;] Hkksiky

eaMy dk;kZy;] Hkksiky ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa eè;izns'k jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 12 ftys

ih,uch gkmQl]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

vfjjk fgYl]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

Hkksiky&4622001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

csrqy

Hkksiky

nfr;k

gkS'kaxkckn

gjnk

flgksj

fofn'kk

Xokfy;j

eksjsuk

f'koiqj

jk;lsu

¯HkM

24-

eaMy dk;kZy;] bankSj

eaMy dk;kZy;] bankSj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa eè;izns'k jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 19 ftys

bankSj] 20] Lusg uxj]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

bankSj&452001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6180

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

bankSj

c/okuh

[kjxkSu

eanlkSj

uhep

jk;x<+

xquk

v'kksd uxj

[akMok

cqjgkuiqj

jryke

'kktkiqj

f'koiqjh

mTtSu

nsokl

/kj

>kcqvk

vxj

vfyjktiqj

25- eaMy dk;kZy;] tcyiqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] tcyiqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa eè;izns'k jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 20 ftys

tcyiqj] 1227]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

usfi;j Vkmu]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

tcyiqj&482001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

ckyk?kkV

Nrjiqj

¯NnokM+k

¯MMksj

neksg

tcyiqj

dVuh

eaMyk

uj¯lgiqj

jhok

flouh

lkxj

lruk

fl/h

¯lxjkSyh

vuqiiqj

iUuk

'kkgMksy

fVdex`g

mefj;k

26- eaMy dk;kZy;] eqEcbZ

eaMy dk;kZy;] eqEcbZ ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa egkjk"Vª jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys

eqEcbZ] IykWV la[;k

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

lh&9] th CykWd

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

ckanzk oqQykZ dkEiysDl

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

ckanzk (iwoZ)] eqEcbZ

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

egkjk"Vª

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

eqEcbZ

eqEcbZ miuxj

Fkk.ks

jk;x<

27- eaMy dk;kZy;] ukxiqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] ukxiqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa egkjk"Vª jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 16 ftys

ih,uch gkml] ¯dXlos]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

ukxiqj&440001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ+

vdksyk

vejkorh

cqy<+kuk

pUnziqj

xksafn;k

tyxk¡o

ukxiqj

ukansM+

o/kZ

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6181

;oreky

ykrwj

ijHk.kh

HkaMkjk

x<fpjkSyh

¯gxksyh

okf'ke

28- eaMy dk;kZy;] iq.ks

eaMy dk;kZy;] iq.ks ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa egkjk"Vª jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 17 ftys

vjksM+k VkolZ es”kukbu

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

Ýyksj] 9 esykMkbu jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

iq.ks dSEi] iq.ks&411001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

iq.ks

vgenuxj

vkSjaxkckn

/qfy;k

dksYgkiqj

ukfld

lkaxyh

lksykiqj

jRukfxjh

¯l/qnqxZ

lrkjk

uanqjcj

chM

mLekukckn

tkyuk

mÙkjh xksok

nf{k.kh xksok

29- eaMy dk;kZy; xqokgkVh

eaMy dk;kZy;] xqokgkVh ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa vle] v:.kkpy

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

izns'k] es?kky;] ef.kiqj]

uhyfxjh esU'ku] a

f=kiqjk] ukxkySaM] fetksje

Hkaxk/j] th ,l jksM]

jkT;ksa ds uhps fn, x, orZeku

xqokgkVh

82 ftys 'kkfey gSa] esa os

ifjlj tks iatkc us'kuy cSad

ds vius gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy

cSad }kjk vFkok iatkc

us'kuy cSad dh vksj ls iêsð

ij fy, x, gSa %µ

ckjisVk (vle)

cksaxkbZxkao (vle)

dNkj (vle)

fMc#x<+ (vle)

xksys?kkV (vle)

tksjgkV (vle)

dke#i (vle)

djhexat (vle)

uyokM+h (vle)

ukxkao (vle)

frulqf[k;k (vle)

lksfuriqj (vle)

ckWDlk (vle)

fpjkax (vle)

eksjhxk¡o (vle)

/qcjh (vle)

f/ekth (vle)

gykdkaMh (vle)

xksyikM+k (vle)

mnyfxjh (vle)

nkjax (vle)

flclkxj (vle)

dke#i&egkuxjh; (vle)

dkchZ vaxyksax (vle)

dksdjk>kM+ (vle)

y[kheiqj (vle)

vatko (v#.kkpy izns'k)

paxySaM (v#.kkpy izns'k)

fnokax ?kkVh (v#.kkpy izns'k)

iwohZ dkesax (v#.kkpy izns'k)

iwohZ fl;kax (v#.kkpy izns'k)

dqdx dqes (v#.kkpy izns'k)

yksfgr (v#.kkpy izns'k)

yksvj fnckax ?kkVh

(v#.kkpy izns'k)

ikiqeijs (v#.kkpy izns'k)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6182

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

raokx (v#.kkpy izns'k)

frji (v#.kkpy izns'k)

mQijh fl;kax

(v#.kkpy izns'k)

mQijh lqcu fljh

(v#.kkpy izns'k)

if'peh d¯ex

(v#.kkpy izns'k)

if'peh fl;kax

(v#.kkpy izns'k)

fo".kqiqj (euhiqj)

pansy (euhiqj)

bEiQky iwoZ (euhiqj)

bEiQky if'pe (euhiqj)

lsukifr (euhiqj)

rseaxyksax (euhiqj)

FkkmQcy (euhiqj)

mQjc#y (euhiqj)

iwohZ xkjksfgYl (es?kky;)

iwohZ [kklh fgYl (es?kky;)

tSafr;k fgYl (es?kky;)

fjcgksbZ (es?kky;)

nf{k.k xksjks fgYl (es?kky;)

if'pe xkjks fgYl (es?kky;)

if'pe [kklh fgYl (es?kky;)

vkbtksy (fetksje)

pEikbZ (fetksje)

dksykflc (fetksje)

yqxysbZ (fetksje)

yokax rykbZ (fetksje)

ekfer (fetksje)

lkbgk (fetksje)

lkjfPpi (fetksje)

fnekiqj (ukxkySaM)

tqusg chrks (ukxkySaM)

dSiQjh (ukxkySaM)

dksfg;k (ukxkySaM)

yksaxysax (ukxkySaM)

eksdkd paqx (ukxkySaM)

eksu (ukxkySaM)

isjsu (ukxkySaM)

isQd (ukxkySaM)

rq,u lkax (ukxkySaM)

oksdk (ukxkySaM)

/ykbZ (f=kiqjk)

mÙkjh (f=kiqjk)

nf{k.kh (f=kiqjk)

if'peh (f=kiqjk)

30- eaMy dk;kZy;] Hkqous'oj

eaMy dk;kZy;] Hkqous'oj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mM+hlk jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 12 ftys

pkSFkh eafty] nhun;ky

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

Hkou] v'kksd uxj]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

tuiFk] Hkqous'oj]

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

mM+hlk&751009

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

ckyklksj

Hknzd

dVd

/suduky

xtifr

xate

tktiqj

txr ¯lxiqj

[kqnkZ

u;kx<+

iqjh

dsUnzikjk

31- eaMy dk;kZy;] ve`rlj

eaMy dk;kZy;] ve`rlj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys

f}rh; ry eSd yksM jksM

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

lsaV izQkafll LowQy ds lkeus]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

ve`rlj&143001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

ve`rlj

rjurkj.k

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6183

32 eaMy dk;kZy;] gksf'k;kjiqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] gksf'k;kjiqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys

bEizwoesaV VªLV jksM]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

gksf'k;kjiqj&146001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

gksf'k;kjiqj

uoka'kgj

33- eaMy dk;kZy;] tkya/j

eaMy dk;kZy;] tkya/j ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 1 ftyk

tkya/j] flfoy ykbUl]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

tkya/j&144004

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

tkya/j

34- eaMy dk;kZy; HkfVUMk

eaMy dk;kZy;] HkfVUMk ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys

HkfVUMk] ,llhvks&29&31]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

ekWMy VkmQu] isQt&1]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

isQ¯lx Vh oh VkWoj]

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

HkfVUMk&151001

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

HkfVUMk

cjukyk

iQftYdk

iQjhndksV

eqDrlj

35- eaMy dk;kZy; yqf/;kuk

eaMy dk;kZy;] yqf/;kuk ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys

lkbZV ua- 5] fiQjkstiqj

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

i[kksoy jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

yqf/;kuk&141001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

yqf/;kuk

eksaxk

36- eaMy dk;kZy; t;iqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] t;iqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa jktLFkku jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 7 ftys

ih ,u ch gkml] 2]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

usg: Iysl] Vksad jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

t;iqj&302015

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

t;iqj

nkSlk

Vksad

dksVk

cqanh

cjku

>kykokM

37- eaMy dk;kZy; Hkjriqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] Hkjriqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa jktLFkku jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys

ih ,u ch gkml]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

lqij cktkj]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

Hkjriqj&302001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ+

Hkjriqj

/kSyiqj

lokbZ ek/ksiqj

djkSyh

38- eaMy dk;kZy; tks/iqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] tks/iqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa jktLFkku jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 15 ftys

tks/iqj] 802] igyh

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

eafty] pksikfluh jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

tks/iqj&302003

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

vtesj

ckalokM+k

ckM+esj

fHkyokM+k

fprkSM+x<+

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6184

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Mwaxjiqj

tSlyesj

tkykSj

tk/iqj

ukxkSj

ikyh

izrkix<+

jktleUn

fljksgh

mn;iqj

39- eaMy dk;kZy; Jhxaxkuxj

eaMy dk;kZy;] Jhxaxkuxj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa jktLFkku jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 5 ftys

ih,uch gkml] ehjk ekxZ]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

tokgj uxj]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

Jhxaxkuxj&335001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

chdkusj

pq:

>qu>quw

guqekux<+

Jhxaxkuxj

40- eaMy dk;kZy; pSUubZ

eaMy dk;kZy;] pSUubZ ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa rfeyukMq jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 7 ftys

jkW;yk VkolZ] rhljh

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

eafty] U;w uacj 158]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

vUuk lykbZ]

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

pSUubZ&600002

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

pSUubZ

dkaphiqje

fr#osYywj

fr#oUukeykbZ

osYykSj

foYywiqje

djkbZdy (ikafMpsjh ;w-Vh-)

ekgs (ikafMpsjh ;w-Vh-)

ikafMpsjh (ikafMpsjh ;w-Vh-)

;ue (ikafMpsjh ;w-Vh-)

41- eaMy dk;kZy; f=kph

eaMy dk;kZy;] f=kfp ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa rfeyukMq jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 26 ftys

f=kph] ih,uch gkml]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

ch,pbZ,y dSyk'kiqje]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

ratkSj jksM] f=kph&620014

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

vfj;kyqj

dks;Ecrwj

oqQM~Mkyksj

¯MMhxqy

bjksM

dU;koqQekjh

d#M+

enqjbZ

ukxkiV~Vhue

ueDdy

fuyfxjh

iqM~MwdksV~Vh

jkeukFkiqje

lsye

f'koxaxk

ratkowj

Fksuh

fr:usyosyh

fr:ok:j

f=kfp

VwVhdksfju

fojnquxj

/eZiqjh

Ñ".kkfxjh

izsEcywj

fr:iqj

42- eaMy dk;kZy; vkxjk

eaMy dk;kZy;] vkxjk ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 9 ftys

vkxjk] 1&2] j?kqukFk

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

uxj] ,eth jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

vkxjk&282002

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6185

vkxjk

,Vk

fiQjkstkckn

eSuiqjh

eFkqjk

bVkok

gkFkjl

djheuxj

iQ#Z[kkckn

43- eaMy dk;kZy; cjsyh

eaMy dk;kZy;] cjsyh ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys

cjsyh] ihyh Hkhr]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

ckbZ ikl jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

cjsyh&243001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

cjsyh

cnk;w¡

y[kheiqj [khjh

ihyh Hkhr

'kkgtgkaiqj

gjnksbZ

44- eaMy dk;kZy; cqyan'kgj

eaMy dk;kZy;] cqya'kgj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys

cqyan'kgj] ih,uch

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

gkml] ;equkiqje]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

cqyan'kgj&203001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

cqyan'kgj

vyhx<+

45- eaMy dk;kZy; >kalh

eaMy dk;kZy;] >kalh ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 7 ftys

>kalh] lq/k u²lx gkse

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

ds ikl] dkuiqj jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

>kalh&284128

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

>kalh

yfyriqj

egksck

ckank

fp=kowQV

gehjiqj

tkykSu

46- eaMy dk;kZy; y[kumQ

eaMy dk;kZy;] y[kumQ ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 5 ftys

foHkwfr [kaM] xkserh uxj]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

y[kumQ&226001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

y[kumQ

ckjkcadh

lhrkiqj

jk;cjsyh

N=kifr lkgwth egkjkt uxj

47- eaMy dk;kZy; xksj[kiqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] xksj[kiqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 5 ftys

xksj[kiqj] vykniqj]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

rqylh baVj dkWyst ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

lkeus] xksj[kiqj&273001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

xksj[kiqj

nsofj;k

egkjktxat

oqQ'khuxj

lar dchj uxj

48- eaMy dk;kZy; okjk.klh

eaMy dk;kZy;] okjk.klh ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 13 ftys

okjk.klh] ,l&20@56&Mh]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

fn eky] dSaMh jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

okjk.klh dSaV&221002

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6186

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

bykgkckn

vktex<+

dkS'kkach

cfy;k

Hknksgh

pankSyh

xkthiqj

tkSuiqj

emQukFk Hkatu

fetkZiqj

izrkix<+

lksuHknz

okjk.klh

lar jfonkl uxj

49- eaMy dk;kZy; dkuiqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] dkuiqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys

dkuiqj] 59@29] fcjgkuk

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

jksM] dkuiqj&206001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

iQrsgiqj

vkSjS;k

dUukSt

dkuiqj flVh

dkuiqj nsgkr

mUuko

50- eaMy dk;kZy; esjB

eaMy dk;kZy;] esjB ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys

,yvkbZlh fc¯YMx]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

izHkkr uxj] lkdsr&250001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

ckxir

iap'khy uxj

esjB

51- eaMy dk;kZy; eqjknkckn

eaMy dk;kZy;] eqjknkckn ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 7 ftys

eqjknkckn] flfoy ykbZUl]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

eqjknkckn&244001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

fctukSj

vejksgk

lEHky

eqjknkckn

T;ksfrckiqQys uxj

jkeiqj

Hkhe uxj

52- eaMy dk;kZy; eqtÝiQjuxj eaMy dk;kZy;] eqtÝiQjuxj

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

ds iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys

eqtÝiQjuxj

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

68 dEcy okyk ckx]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

eqtÝiQjuxj&251001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

lgkjuiqj

'kkeyh

izcq¼uxj

eqtÝiQjuxj

53- eaMy dk;kZy; nsgjknwu

eaMy dk;kZy;] nsgjknwu ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkjk[akM jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys

nsgjknwu] ih,uch gkml]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

iYVu cktkj]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

nsgjknwu&248001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

nsgjknwu

mÙkjdk'kh

Vsgjh&x<+oky

54- eaMy dk;kZy; gfj}kj

eaMy dk;kZy;] gfj}kj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkjk[kaM jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys

gfj}kj] ih,uch gkml]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

lSDVj&4] ch,p,y

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

dkWEIySDl] gfj}kj

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6187

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

gfj}kj

peksyh

ikSMh

#æiz;kx

55- eaMy dk;kZy; dk'khiqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] dk'khiqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkjk[kaM jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys

dk'khiqj] cktiqj jksM]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

dk'khiqj&244713

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

vYeksM+k

uSuhrky

m/e ¯lg uxj

fiFkkSjkx<+

ckxs'oj

pEikor

56- eaMy dk;kZy; dksydkrk

eaMy dk;kZy;] $ ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa if'pe caxky jkT;

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

ds uhps fn, x, orZeku 7 ftys

dksydkrk] r`rh; ry]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

,th Vkoj] 125@1]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

ikdZ LVªhV]

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

dksydkrk&700017

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

dksydkrk

24 ijxuk (nf{k.k)

24 ijxuk (mÙkj)

gkoM+k

fudksckj

mÙkj vkSj eè; vaMeku

nf{k.k vaMeku (iksVZ Cys;j)

57- eaMy dk;kZy; cnZoku

eaMy dk;kZy;] cnZoku ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa if'peh caxky jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 16 ftys

103] thVh jksM] f}rh; ry]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

iSaQlh ekdsZV dkWEIySDl]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

c¼Zoku&713101

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

cnZoku

cadqjk

nk£t¯yx

chjHkwe

ekynk

nf{k.k fnuktiqj

gqxyh

tyikbZxqM+h

eq'khZnkckn

mÙkj fnuktiqj

ukfM;k

dwp fcgkj

iwohZ flfDde

mÙkjh flfDde

nf{k.k flfDde

if'pe flfDde

58- eaMy dk;kZy; fenukiqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] fenukiqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa if'pe caxky jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys

fenukiqj] fo|klkxj jksM]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

cVkyk pkSd]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

fenukiqj&721001

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

if'pe fenukiqj

iwohZ fenukiqj

iqjfy;k

59- eaMy dk;kZy; nf{k.k

eaMy dk;kZy;] nf{k.k fnYyh

fnYyh ds ofj"Bre

ds iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

lgk;d egkizcU/d]

ftlesa fnYyh] gfj;k.kk izns'k

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

jkT; ds uhps fn, x, orZeku

prqFkZ ry] jktsUnz Hkou]

6 ftys 'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj

jktsUnz Iysl]

tks iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

ubZ fnYyh&110008

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

nf{k.k fnYyh

nf{k.k iwoZ fnYyh

iQjhnkckn (gfj;k.kk)

xqM+xkao (gfj;k.kk)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6188

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

esokr (gfj;k.kk)

iyoy (gfj;k.kk)

60- eaMy dk;kZy; iSQtkckn

eaMy dk;kZy;] iSQtkckn ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 9 ftys

iSQtkckn] vkpk;Z

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

ujsUnz nso uxj]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

iSQtkckn&224001 (m-iz-)

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

cLrh

fl¼kFkZ uxj

cyjkeiqj

vEcsMdj uxj

lqYrkuiqj

cgjkbp

iSQtkckn

xksaMk

JkoLrh

61- eaMy dk;kZy; diwjFkyk

eaMy dk;kZy;] diwjFkyk ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys

diwjFkyk] ih,uch gkml]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

lR;ukjk;.k eafnj cktkj]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

diwjFkyk&144601

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

xqjnkliqj

diwjFkyk

iBkudksV

62- eaMy dk;kZy; ifV;kyk

eaMy dk;kZy;] ifV;kyk ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys

ifV;kyk] dje

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

dkWEIySDl] lj¯gn jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

ifV;kyk&147001 (iatkc)

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

lax#j

iQrsgx< lkfgc

jksiM+

eksgkyh

ifV;kyk

ekUlk

63- eaMy dk;kZy; oqQ#{ks=k

eaMy dk;kZy;] oqQ#{ks=k ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa gfj;k.kk jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys

oqQ#{ks=k] Nkrk

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

dkWEIySDl] fiiyh jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

oqQ#{ks=k&136118 (gfj;k.kk) gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

dSFky

oqQ#{ks=k

;equkuxj

¯tn

64- eaMy dk;kZy; vyoj

eaMy dk;kZy;] vyoj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa jktLFkku jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys

vyoj] izFke ry]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

euq ekxZ] vyoj&301001

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

(jktLFkku)

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

vyoj

lhdj

65- eaMy dk;kZy; ,.kkZoqQye

eaMy dk;kZy;] ,.kkZoqQye ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa dsjyk jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 9 ftys

,.kkZdqye] 40@1461

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

ekdsZV jksM]

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

,.kkZdqye&682011

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

vykiw>k

,.kkZoqQye

bnqDdh

dksV~Vk;e

iV~VkufeV~Vk

DohykWu@dksykWe

f=kpwj

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6189

f=kosUnze

dksYye

66- eaMy dk;kZy; lwjr

eaMy dk;kZy;] lwjr ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa xqtjkr jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 15 ftys

prqFkZ ry] rqylh Ñik

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

vkjdsM ckjMksyh jksM

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

lwjr&394214 (xqtjkr)

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

vkuan

Hk:p

ngksM

Mkax

[ksM+k

uolkjh

ueZnk

iapegy

lwjr

rkih

oMksnjk

oylkM

neu (neu ,oa fgM) la?k

'kkflr

}hi (neu ,oa fgM) la?k

'kkflr

nknjk ,oa uxj gosyh la?k

'kkflr

67- eaMy dk;kZy;] uks,Mk

eaMy dk;kZy;] uks,Mk ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys

rhljk ry] lh&13]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

lsDVj 1] uks,Mk

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

(xkSre cq¼ uxj)]

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

mÙkj izns'k

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

xkft;kckn

uks,Mk (xkSre cq¼ uxj)

68- eaMy dk;kZy; eè; fnYyh

eaMy dk;kZy;] eè; fnYyh ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

uhps fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys

prqFkZ ry] jktsUnz Hkou]

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

jktsUnz Iysl] ubZ fnYyh

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

eè; fnYyh

ubZ fnYyh

nf{k.k if'pe fnYyh

if'peh fnYyh

mÙkjh fnYyh

mÙkjh if'peh fnYyh

69- eaMy dk;kZy; lacyiqj

eaMy dk;kZy;] laHkyiqj ds

ds ofj"Bre lgk;d

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu

egkizcU/d]

ftlesa mM+hlk jkT; ds uhps

iatkc us'kuy cSad]

fn, x, orZeku 18 ftys

euksjek fc¯YMx nkuhiYyh

'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks

HkheHkksbZ uxj] iksLV

iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius

vkfiQl cq¼jktk]

gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk

laHkyiqj&768005

vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh

vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ

vuqxy

ckjkx<+

cyafxj

cm/

nsox<+

>kMlqxqMk

dkykgaMh

dka/key

dsU/w>kj

dksjkiwV

eydkufxjh

e;wjHkat

ucjaxkiqj

ukSmikMk

jk;kx<+

lacyiqj

lqcuZiqj

lqUnjx<+

dsvksu>kj

¹iQk- la- 4@3@2013&chvks,º

,e- ,e- nkSyk] voj lfpo

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6190

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 3rd September, 2014

S.O.

2435.—In exercise of the powers conferred

by section 3 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized

Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971), the Central Government

hereby appoints the Officer mentioned in column No. 2 of

the table below to be Estate Officers for the purpose of the

said Act and further direct that the said officers shall exercise

the powers conferred and the duties imposed on an Estate

Officers by or under the said Act within the local limits of

his jurisdiction in respect of the public premises falling

under area as specified in column No. 3 of the table below:—

S.No. Designation of

Categories of public premises

the Officer

and local limits of control of

jurisdiction

(1)

(2)

(3)

1. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Hyderabad, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

6-1-73, Lakadi

Circle Office, Hyderabad, in the

Ka Pul, Saifabad,

State of Telangana &

Hyderabad-500004.

Seemandhra,

presently

consisting 23 Districts,

mentioned below :

East Godavari District

Guntur

Chittoor

Hyderabad

Kadapa

Karim Nagar

Krishna

Kurnool

Mahabubnagar

Anantpur

Nalgonda

Nellore

Nizamabad

Prakasam

Ranga Reddy

Srikakulam

Visakhapatnam

Vizianagaram

Warangal

West Godavari District

Medak

Khammam

Adilabad

2. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Muzaffarpur,

Punjab National Bank within

Punjab National

the administrative control of

Bank, Aghoria

Circle Office Muzaffarpur, in

Bazar ,

the State of Bihar, presently

Muzafarpur 842002

consisting

9

Districts

mentioned below :

Muzaffarpur

Sitamarhi

Siwan

Gopalganj

East Champaran

West Champaran

Saran

Vaishali

Sheohar

3. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Darbhanga,

Punjab National Bank within

Punjab National

the administrative control of

Bank, Darbhanga,

Circle Office Darbhanga, in

Commercial House,

the State of Bihar, presently

Laharia Sarai,

consisting 12 Districts

Darbhanga-846001

mentioned below :

Madhubani

Samastipur

Begusarai

Saharsa

Supaul

Araria

Purnia

Katihar

Kishanganj

Darbhanga

Khagaria

Madhepura

4. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Patna,

Punjab National Bank within

Punjab National

the administrative control of

Bank, R-Block,

Circle Office Patna, in the State

Chanakya Tower,

of Bihar, presently consisting

Patna-842001

1 District, mentioned below:

Patna

5. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Arrah, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6191

Arrah, Hotal Regal

Circle Office Arrah, in the State

Complex, 2nd Floor

of Bihar, presently consisting

East Ramanna Road, 4 Districts, mentioned below:

Arrah (Bihar)

Kaimur

Bhojpur

Buxar

Rohtas

6. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Bihar Sharif, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Ramchanderpur,

Circle Office Bihar Sharif, in the

Bihar Sharif 803101

State of Bihar, presently

consisting

8

Districts,

mentioned below:

Lahkisarai

Nalanda

Nawada

Jamui

Sheikhpura

Bhagalpur

Munger

Banka

7. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Gaya, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Gaya, 400 A.P.

Circle Office of Bihar, pres-

Colony

ently consisting 4 Districts,

Gaya 823001

mentioned below:

Gaya

Aurangabad

Jehanabad

Arwal

8. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Raipur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Madina Manjil

Circle Office Raipur, in the

Kachehri Chowk,

State of Chhattisgarh, pres-

Raipur

ently consisting 27 Districts,

(Chhattisgarh)

mentioned below:

Bastar

Bilaspur

Dhamtari

Durg

Janjgir – Champa

Korba

Koria

Mahassmund

Raigarh

Raipur

Rajnandgaon

Dantewada

Jashpur

Kawardha

Balod

Balodabazar

Balrampur

Bemetara

Bijapur

Gariyaband

Kanker

Kondagaon

Mungeli

Narainpur

Surguja

Sukma

Surajpur

9. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

North Delhi, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

4th Floor, Rajendra

Circle Office North Delhi, in

Bhawan, Rajendra

the State of Delhi presently

Place, New Delhi

consisting 6 Districts, men-

tioned below:

East Delhi

North East Delhi

North Delhi

North West Delhi

West Delhi

Central Delhi

10. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Ahmedabad, Punjab Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Gujarat Bhawan

Circle Office Ahmedabad, in

facing MJ Library,

the State of Gujarat, and

Elice Pul, Ashram

Lakshadweep (UT) presently

Road, Ahmedabad-

consisting 16 Districts, men-

380006

tioned below:

Ahmedabad

Amreli

Bhavnagar

Banaskantha

Gandhinagar

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6192

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Jamnagar

Junagadh

Kutch

Mehsana

Patan

Porbandar

Rajkot

Sabarkantha

Surendranagar

Morbi

Lakshadweep (U.T.)

11. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Chandigarh, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

PNB House,

Circle Office Chandigarh, in

Sector 17-B,

the State of Haryana, &

Chandigarh-160017

Chandigarh (UT) presently

consisting 3 Districts, men-

tioned below:

Chandigarh (UT)

Panchkula (Haryana)

Ambala (Haryana)

12. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Hisar, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Hisar, Opposite

Circle Office Hisar, in the State

ITI Chowk, Dabra

of Haryana, presently consist-

Road, Hisar-125005

ing 3 Districts, mentioned

below:

Hisar

Sirsa

Fatehabad

13. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Karnal, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Bay-21-22,

Circle Office Karnal, in the

Sector-12, HUDA

State of Haryana, presently

Karnal 132001

consisting 3 Districts, men-

tioned below:

Karnal

Panipat

Sonepat

14. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Rohtak, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Rohtak, Ram

Circle Office Rohtak in the

Gopal Colony,

State of Haryana, presently

Sonepat Road,

consisting 5 Districts, men-

Rohtak 124001

tioned below:

Rohtak

Jhajjhar

Rewari

Mahendragarh

Bhiwani

15. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Shimla, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Shimla, Regent

Circle Office Shimla in the

House, The Mall,

State of Himachal Pradesh,

Shimla-171001

presently consisting 4 Dis-

tricts, mentioned below:

Kinnaur

Shimla

Sirmaur

Solan

16. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Dharamshala,

Punjab National Bank within

Punjab National

the administrative control of

Bank, Kachehri

Circle Office Dharamshala, in

Road, Near GPO,

the State of Himachal Pradesh,

Dharamshala-

presently consisting 2 Dis-

176215

tricts, mentioned below:

Kangra

Chamba

17 Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Hamir pur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Hamirpur, New Road, Circle Office Hamirpur in the

Hamirpur-177001

State of Himachal Pradesh,

presently consisting 3 districts

mentioned below:

Hamirpur

Una

Bilaspur

18 Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Mandi, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

M.R. Road,

Circle Office Mandi in the State

Batala Chowk

of Himachal Pradesh, pres-

Mandi-175001

ently consisting 3 Districts,

mentioned below :

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6193

Mandi

Kullu

Keylong

19. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Jammu, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

High Land Tower

Circle Office Jammu, in the

Rail Head Complex,

State of J & K, presently con-

Jammu-180012

sisting 21 Districts, mentioned

below :

Jammu

Kathua

Samba

Poonch

Rajouri

Doda

Reasi

Ramban

Udhampur

Srinagar

Anantnag

Kargil

Pulwama

Badgam

Baramulla

Kupwara

Leh

Ganderbal

Bandipora

Kishtwar

Sopian

20. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Ranchi, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Bagrai Market,

Circle Office Ranchi, in the

Main Road, Ranchi

State of Jharkhand, presently

834001 (Jharkhand)

consisting 24 Districts, men-

tioned below:

Ranchi

East Singhbhum

West Singhbhum

Saraikela

Bokaro

Dhanbad

Palamu

Latehar

Garhwa

Giridih

Hazaribagh

Chatra

Lohardaga

Godda

Deoghar

Dumka

Gumla

Jamatra

Khunti

Koderma

Pakur

Ramgarh

Sahebganj

Simdega

21. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Karnataka, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

26-27, M.G. Road,

Circle Office Bangalore, in the

Raheja Towers,

State of Karnataka, presently

Bangalore-560001

consisting 30 Districts, men-

tioned below:

Bangalore

Ramnagara

Belgaum

Bidar

Bijapur

Dakshin Kannada

Dharwad

Davangere

Gadag

Gulbarga

Hassan

Kolar

Mandya

Mysore

North Kannada

Shimoga

Tumkur

Udipi

Bellari

Bagalkot

Banglore Rural

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6194

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Chamrajanagar

Chikmanglore

Chikballapur

Chitradurga

Haveri

Kodagu

Koppal

Raichur

Yadagiri

22. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Kozhikode, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Shatabadi Bhawan,

Circle Office Kozhikode in the

Mini Bypass Road,

State of Kerala, presently con-

PO. Govindpuram,

sisting 6 Districts, mentioned

Kozhikode-673016

below:

Kannur

Kasargod

Kozhikode

Malapuram

Palakad

Wyanad

23. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Bhopal, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Bhopal, PNB House, Circle Office Bhopal, in the

Arera Hills,

State of Madhya Pradesh,

Bhopal-4622011

presently consisting 12 Dis-

tricts, mentioned below:

Betul

Bhopal

Datia

Hoshangabad

Harda

Sehore

Vidisha

Gwalior

Morena

Sheopur

Raisen

Bhind

24. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Indore, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Indore 20,

Circle Office Indore, in the

Sneh Nagar,

State of Madhya Pradesh,

Indore-452001

presently consisting 19 Dis-

tricts, mentioned below:

Indore

Barwani

Khargone

Mandsaur

Neemuch

Rajgarh

Guna

Ashok Nagar

Khandwa

Burhanpur

Ratlam

Shajapur

Shivpuri

Ujjain

Dewas

Dhar

Jhabua

Agar

Alirajpur

25. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Jabalpur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Jabalpur, 1227,

Circle Office Jabalpur, in the

Napier Town,

State of Madhya Pradesh,

Jabalpur-482001

presently consisting 20 Dis-

tricts, mentioned below:

Balaghat

Chhatarpur

Chhindwara

Dindore

Damoh

Jabalpur

Katni

Mandla

Narsinghpur

Rewa

Seoni

Sagar

Satna

Sidhi

Singrauli

Anuppur

Panna

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6195

Shahdol

Tikamgarh

Umaria

26. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Mumbai, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Plot No. C-9,

Circle Office Mumbai, in the

G Block, Bandra

State of Maharashtra, pres-

Kurla Complex,

ently consisting 4 Districts,

Bandra (East)

mentioned below :

Mumbai

Mumbai

(Maharashtra)

Mumbai Suburban

Thane

Raigad

27. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Nagpur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

PNB House,

Circle Office Nagpur, in the

Kingsway,

State of Maharashtra, pres-

Nagpur-440001

ently consisting 16 Districts,

mentioned below:

Akola

Amravati

Buldhana

Chandrapur

Gondia

Jalgaon

Nagpur

Nanded

Wardha

yeotmal

Latur

Parbhani

Bhandara

Gadchirolli

Hingoli

Washim

28. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Pune, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Arora Towers

Circle Office Pune, in the State

Beznine Floor,

of Maharashtra & Goa, pres-

9 Moledine Road,

ently consisting 17 Districts,

Pune Camp,

mentioned below:

Pune-411001

Pune

Ahmednagar

Aurangabad

Dhulia

Kolhapur

Nasik

Sangli

Solapur

Ratnagiri

Sindudurg

Satara

Nandurbar

Beed

Osmanabad

Jalna

North Goa

South Goa

29. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

North Eastern

Punjab National Bank within

Circle, Punjab

the administrative control of

National Bank,

Circle Office Guwahati, in the

Neelgiri Mansion,

state of Assam, Arunachal

Bhangadhar,

Pradesh Meghalaya, Manipur,

G S Road,

Tripura, Nagaland, Mizoram,

Guwahati

presently consisting 82 Dis-

tricts, mentioned below.

Barpeta (Assam)

Bongaigaon (Assam)

Cachar (Assam)

Dibrugarh (Assam)

Goleghat (Assam)

Jorhat (Assam)

Kamrup (Assam)

Karimganj (Assam)

Nalbari (Assam)

North Cachar Hills (Assam)

Nagaon (Assam)

Tinsukia (Assam)

Sonitpur (Assam)

Baksa (Assam)

Chirang ( Assam)

Morigaon (Assam)

Dhubri (Assam)

Dhemaji (Assam)

Hailakandi (Assam)

Goalpara (Assam)

Udalgiri (Assam)

Darrang (Assam)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6196

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Sibsagar (Assam)

Kamrup–Metropolitan (Assam)

Karbi Anglong (Assam)

Kokrajhar (Assam)

Lakhimpur (Assam)

Anjaw (Arunachal Pradesh)

Changland (Arunachal

Pradesh)

Dibang Valley (Arunachal

Pradesh)

East Kameng (Arunachal

Pradesh)

East Siang (Arunachal

Pradesh)

Kurung Kumaey (Arunachal

Pradesh)

Lohit (Arunachal Pradesh)

Lower Dibang Valley

(Arunachal Pradesh)

Lower Subansiri (Arunachal

Pradesh)

Papumpare (Arunachal

Pradesh)

Tawang (Arunachal Pradesh)

Tirap (Arunachal Pradesh)

Upper Siang (Arunachal

Pradesh)

Upper Subansiri (Arunachal

Pradesh)

West Kameng (Arunachal

Pradesh)

West Siang (Arunachal

Pradesh)

Bishnupur (Manipur)

Chandel (Manipur)

Churachandpur (Manipur)

Imphal East (Manipur)

Imphal West (Manipur)

Senapati (Manipur)

Tamenglong (Manipur)

Thoubal (Manipur)

Ukhrul (Manipur)

East Garo Hills (Meghalya)

East Khasi Hills (Meghalya)

Jaintia Hills (Meghalya)

Ribhoi (Meghalya)

South Garo Hills (Meghalya)

West Garo Hills (Meghalya )

West Khasi Hills (Meghalya)

Aizawl (Mizoram)

Champhai (Mizoram)

Kolasib (Mizoram)

Lunglei (Mizoram)

Lwangtlai (Mizoram)

Mamit (Mizoram)

Saiha (Mizoram)

Sarchhip (Mizoram)

Dimapur (Nagaland)

Junheboto (Nagaland)

Kephrie (Nagaland)

Kohima (Nagaland)

Longleng (Nagaland)

Mokokchung (Nagaland)

Mon (Nagaland)

Peren (Nagaland)

Phek (Nagaland)

Tuensang (Nagaland)

Wokha (Nagaland)

Dhalai (Tripura)

North Tripura (Tripura)

South Tripura (Tripura)

West Tripura (Tripura)

30. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Bhubaneshwar,

Punjab National Bank within

Punjab National

the administrative control of

Bank, 4th Floor,

Circle Office Bhubaneshwar, in

Deendayal Bhawan, the state of Orissa presently

Ashok Nagar,

consisting 12 Districts,

Janpath,

mentioned below:

Bhubaneshwar,

Balasore

Orissa-751009

Bhadrak

Cuttack

Dhenkanal

Gajapati

Ganjam

Jajpur

Jagat Singhpur

Khurdha

Nayagarh

Puri

Kendrapara

31. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Amritsar, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6197

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Amritsar, IInd Floor, Circle Office , Amritsar, in the

Macload Road,

state of Punjab presently con-

Opposite St.

sisting 2 Districts, mentioned

Francies School,

below :

Amritsar-143001

Amritsar

Taran Taran

32. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Hoshiarpur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Improvement Trust

Circle Office Hoshiarpur, in the

Road Chandigarh

state of Punjab presently con-

Road, Hoshiarpur-

sisting 3 Districts, mentioned

146001

below :

Hoshiarpur

Shahid Bhagat Singh Nagar

Nawanshahar

33. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Jalandhar, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Jalandhar,

Circle Office , Jalandhar, in the

Civil Lines,

state of Punjab presently con-

Jalandhar-144001

sisting 1 Districts, mentioned

below :

Jalandhar

34. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Bathinda, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Bathinda, SCO-29-31 Circle Office, Bathinda, in the

Model Town Phase-I, state of Punjab presently con-

Facing TV Tower,

sisting 6 Districts, mentioned

Bathinda-151001

below:

Bathinda

Barnala

Firozepur

Fazilka

Faridkot

Muktsar

35. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Ludhiana, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Site No. 5,

Circle Office Ludhiana, in the

Firozepur Road,

state of Punjab presently con-

Ludhiana-141001

sisting 2 Districts, mentioned

below :

Ludhiana

Moga

36. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Jaipur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Jaipur, PNB House,

Circle Office, Jaipur, in the

2 Nehru Place,

state of Rajasthan presently

Tonk Road,

consisting 7 Districts, men-

Jaipur-302015

tioned below :—

Jaipur

Dausa

Tonk

Kota

Bundi

Baran

Jhalawar

37. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Bharatpur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Bharatpur, PNB

Circle Office, Bharatpur, in the

House, Super Bazar, state of Rajasthan presently

Bharatpur-302001

consisting 4 Districts, men-

tioned below :

Bharatpur

Dholpur

Sawai Madhopur

Karauli

38. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Jodhpur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Jodhpur, 802,

Circle Office, Jodhpur, in the

1st Floor,

state of Rajasthan presently

Chopasini Road,

consisting 15 Districts, men-

Jodhpur-302003

tioned below :

Ajmer

Banswara

Barmer

Bhilwara

Chittorgarh

Dungarpur

Jaisalmer

Jalore

Jodhpur

Nagore

Pali

Pratapgarh

Rajsamand

Sirohi

Udaipur

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6198

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

39. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Sriganganagar,

Punjab National Bank within

Punjab National

the administrative control of

Bank, Sriganganagar Circle Office, Sriganganagar, in

PNB House,

the state of Rajasthan pres-

Meera Marg,

ently consisting 5 Districts,

Jawahar Nagar,

mentioned below :

Srigaganagar-

Bikaner

335001

Churu

Jhunjhunu

Hanumangarh

Sriganganagar

40. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Chennai, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Chennai, Royala

Circle Office, Chennai, in the

Towers Third Floor,

state of Tamilnadu presently

New No. 158, Salai

consisting 10 Districts, men-

Chennai-600002

tioned below :

Chennai

Kanchipuram

Tiruvallur

Tiruvannamalai

Vellore

Villupuram

Karaikal (Puducherry U.T.)

Mahe (Puducherry U.T.)

Puducherry (Puducherry U.T.)

Yanam (Puducherry U.T.)

41. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Trichy, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Trichy, PNB House,

Circle Office, Trichy, in the

BHEL Kailashpuram, state of Tamilnadu presently

Tanjore Road,

consisting 26 Districts, men-

Trichy-620014

tioned below :

Ariyalur

Coimbatore

Cuddalore

Dindigul

Erode

Kanyakumari

Karur

Madurai

Nagapattinam

Namakkal

Nilgiris

Pudukottai

Ramanathapuram

Salem

Sivaganga

Thanjavur

Theni

Thirunelveli

Tiruvarur

Trichy

Tuticorin

Virudunagar

Dharampuri

Krishnagiri

Perambalur

Tirupur

42. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Agra, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Agra, 1-2, Rahunath Circle Office, Agra, in the state

Nagar, M.G. Road,

of Uttar Pradesh presently

Agra-282002

consisting 9 Districts, men-

tioned below :

Agra

Etah

Firozabad

Mainpuri

Mathura

Etawah

Hathras

Kashiram Nagar

Farrukhabad

43. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Bareilly, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Bareilly, PNB House, Circle Office, Bareilly, in the

Pilibhit bye pass

state of Uttar Pradesh pres-

Road, Bareilly-

ently consisting 6 Districts,

243001

mentioned below :

Bareilly

Budaun

Lakhimpur Kheri

Pilibhit

Shahjahanpur

Hardoi

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6199

44. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Bulandshahr, Punjab Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Bulandshahr,

Circle Office, Bulandshahr, in

PNB House,

the state of Uttar Pradesh

Yamunapuram,

presently consisting 2 Dis-

Bulandshahr-203001 tricts, mentioned below :

Bulandshahar

Aligarh

45. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Jhansi, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Jhansi, Near Sudha

Circle Office, Jhansi, in the

Nursing Home,

state of Uttar Pradesh pres-

Kanpur Road,

ently consisting 7 Districts,

Jhansi-284128

mentioned below :

Jhansi

Lalitpur

Mahoba

Banda

Chitrakoot

Hamirpur

Jalaun

46. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Lucknow, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Lucknow, Bibhuti

Circle Office, Lucknow, in the

Khand, Gomtinagar,

state of Uttar Pradesh pres-

Lucknow-226001

ently consisting 5 Districts,

mentioned below :

Lucknow

Barabanki

Sitapur

Raibareli

Chhatrapati Sahu ji Maharaj

Nagar

47. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Gorakhpur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Gorakhpur, Alladpur Circle Office, Gorakhpur, in the

Opposite Tulsi

state of Uttar Pradesh pres-

Inter College,

ently consisting 5 Districts,

Gorakhpur-273001

mentioned below :

Gorakhpur

Deoria

Maharajganj

Kushinagar

Sant KabirNagar

48. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Varanasi, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Varanasi, S-20/56-D, Circle Office, Varanasi, in the

The Mall, Canady

state of Uttar Pradesh pres-

Road, Varanasi Cantt. ently consisting 14 Districts,

Varanasi-221002

mentioned below :

Allahabad

Azamgarh

Kaushambi

Ballia

Bhadohi

Chandauli

Ghazipur

Jaunpur

Maunath Bhanjan

Mirzapur

Pratapgarh

Sonbhadra

Varanasi

Sant Ravidas Nagar

49. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Kanpur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Kanpur, 59/29,

Circle Office, Kanpur, in the

Birhana Road,

state of Uttar Pradesh pres-

Kanpur-206001

ently consisting 6 Districts,

mentioned below :

Fatehpur

Auriya

Kannauj

Kanpur City

Kanpur Dehat

Unnao

50. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Meerut, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Meerut, LIC Bldg,

Circle Office, Meerut, in the

Prabhat Nagar,

state of Uttar Pradesh pres-

Saket, Meerut-

ently consisting 3 Districts,

250001

mentioned below :

Baghpat

Panchsheel Nagar

Meerut

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6200

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

51. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Moradabad, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Moradabad, Ram

Circle Office, Moradabad, in

Ganga Vihar,

the state of Uttar Pradesh

Civil Lines,

presently consisting 7 Dis-

Moradabad-244001

tricts, mentioned below:

Bijnor

Amroha

Sambhal

Moradabad

Jyotiba Phule Nagar

Rampur

Bhim Nagar

52. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Muzaffarnagar,

Punjab National Bank within

Punjab National

the administrative control of

Bank, Muzaffarnagar, Circle Office, Muzaffarnagar,

68 Kumbal Wala

in the state of Uttar Pradesh

Bagh, Muzaffarnagar- presently consisting 4 Dis-

251001

tricts, mentioned below :

Saharanpur

Shamli

Prabudhnagar

Muzaffarnagar

53. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Dehradun, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Dehradune, PNB

Circle Office, Dehradun, in the

House, Paltan Bazar, state of Uttarakhand presently

Dehradun-248001

consisting 3 Districts, men-

tioned below :

Dehradun

Uttarkashi

Tehri-Garhwal

54. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Hardwar, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Hardwar, PNB

Circle Office, Hardwar, in the

House, Sector-4,

state of Uttarakhand presently

BHEL Complex,

consisting 4 Districts, men-

Hardwar

tioned below :

Hardwar

Chamoli

Pauri-Garhwal

Rudraprayag

55. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Kashipur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Kashipur, Bazpur

Circle Office, Kashipur, in the

Road, Kashipur-

state of Uttarakhand presently

244716

consisting 6 Districts, men-

tioned below :

Almora

Nainital

Udham Singh Nagar

Pithoragarh

Bageshwar

Champawat

56. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Kolkata, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Kolkata, III Floor,

Circle Office, Kolkata, in the

AG Tower, 125/1,

state

of

West

Bengal

Park Street,

Andaman (UT) presently con-

Kolkata-700017

sisting 7 Districts, mentioned

below :

Kolkata

24 Parganas (South)

24 Parganas (North)

Howrah

Nicobar

North &Middle Andaman

South Andaman (Port Blair)

57. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Burdwan, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

103, GT Road,

Circle Office, Burdwan, in the

II Floor, Fancy

state of West Bengal presently

Market Complex,

consisting 16 Districts, men-

Burdwan-713101

tioned below ;

Burdwan

Bankura

Darjeeling

Birbhum

Malda

Dakshin Dinajpur

Hoogly

Jalpaiguri

Murshidabad

Uttar Dinajpur

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6201

Nadia

Cooch Bihar

East Sikkim

North Sikkim

South Sikkim

West Sikkim

58. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Midnapur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Midnapur,

Circle Office, Midnapore, in

Vidyasagar Road,

the state of West Bengal pres-

Batala Chowk,

ently consisting 3 Districts,

Midnapore-721101

mentioned below

West Midnapore

East Midnapore

Purulia

59. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

South Delhi, Punjab Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

4th Floor, Rajendra

Circle Office, South Delhi, in

Bhawan, Rajendra

the state of Delhi & Haryana

Place, New Delhi

presently consisting 6 Dis-

tricts, mentioned below:

South Delhi

South West Delhi

Faridabad (Haryana)

Gurgaon (Haryana)

Mewat (Haryana)

Palwal (Haryana)

60. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Faizabad, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Faizabad, Acharya

Circle Office, Faizabad, in the

Narendra Dev Nagar, state of Uttar Pradesh pres-

Faizabad-224001

ently consisting 9 Districts,

(U.P.)

mentioned below :

Basti

Siddhartnagar

Balrampur

Ambedkarnagar

Sultanpur

Bahraich

Faizabad

Gonda

Srawasti

61. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Kapoorthala, Punjab Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Kapoorthala, PNB

Circle Office, Kapoorthala in

House, Satya Narain the state of Punjab presently

Mandir Bazar,

consisting 3 Districts, men-

Kapoorthala-144601 tioned below :

Gurudaspur

Kapoorthala

Pathankot

62. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Patiala, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Patiala, Karam

Circle Office, Patiala in the

Complex, Sirhind

state of Punjab presently con-

Road, Patiala-147001 sisting 6 Districts, mentioned

(Punjab)

below :

Sangrur

Fatehgarh sahib

Ropar

Mohali

Patiala

Mansa

63. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Kurukshetra, Punjab Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Kurukshetra, Chhata Circle Office, Kurukshetra in

Complex, Pipli Road

the state of Haryana presently

Kurukshetra-136118 consisting 4 Districts, men-

(Haryana)

tioned below :

Kaithal

Kurukshetra

Yamunanagar

Jind

64. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Alwar, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Alwar, Pratham

Circle Office, Alwar in the state

Manzil Manu Marg, of Rajasthan presently con-

Alwar-301001

sisting 2 Districts, mentioned

(Rajasthan)

below :

Alwar,

Sikar

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

6202

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

65. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Ernakulam, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Ernakulam, 40/1461,

Circle Office, Ernakulam in the

Market Road,

state of Kerala presently con-

Ernakulam-682011

sisting 9 Districts, mentioned

below :—

Alapuzha

Ernakulam

Idukki

Kottayam

Pathanmitha

Quilon

Thrissur

Thiruvananthapuram

Kollam

66. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Surat, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

4th Floor, Tulsi

Circle Office, Surat in the state

Kripa Archade,

of Gujarat presently consisting

Bardoli Road,

15 Districts, mentioned below:

Surat-394214

Anand,

(Gujarat)

Bharuch,

Dahod,

Dang,

Kheda,

Navsari,

Narmada,

Panchmahal,

Surat,

Tapi,

Vadodra,

Valsad,

Daman (Daman & Diu U T),

Diu (Daman & Diu U T),

Dadra & Nagar Haveli (UT)

67. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Noida, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

3rd Floor, C-13,

Circle Office, Noida in the state

Sector 1, Noida,

of Uttar Pradesh presently

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(Gautam Budh Nagar) consisting 2 Districts, men-

U.P.

tioned below:-

Ghaziabad

Noida (Gautam Budh Nagar)

68. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Central Delhi, Punjab Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

4th Floor, Rajendra

Circle Office, Central Delhi in

Bhawan, Rajendra

the state of Delhi presently

Place, New Delhi

consisting 6 Districts, men-

tioned below:-

Central Delhi,

New Delhi,

South West Delhi,

West Delhi,

North Delhi,

North West Delhi

69. Senior most AGM

Premises, belonging to or taken

of Circle Office,

on lease by or on behalf of

Sambalpur, Punjab

Punjab National Bank within

National Bank,

the administrative control of

Sambalpur : Manorma Circle Office, Sambhalpur in

Building Danipalli,

the state of Odhisa presently

Bhimbhoinaghar

consisting 18 Districts, men-

PO : Budhraja

tioned below:-

Sambalpur-768005

Anugul,

Baragarh,

Balangir,

Boudh,

Deogarh,

Jharsuguda,

Kalahandi,

Kandhamal,

Koraput,

Malkangiri,

Mayurbhanj,

Nabrangapur,

Nuapada,

Rayagada,

Sambalpur,

Subarnapur,

Sundergarh,

Keonjhar

[F. No. 4/3/2013-BOA]

M. M. DAWLA, Under Secy.

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6203

ekuo lalk/u fodkl ea=kky;

(mPprj f'k{kk foHkkx)

(jktHkk"kk ;wfuV)

ubZ fnYYkh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2436.—dsUnzh; ljdkj] jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh;

iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds mi&fu;e 4

ds vuqlj.k esa] ekuo lalk/u fodkl ea=kky; (LowQy f'k{kk ,oa

lk{kjrk foHkkx) ds varxZr dsanzh; fo|ky; laxBu (eq[;ky;)]

ubZ fnYyh ds fuEufyf[kr 6 dsanzh; fo|ky;ksa dks] ,sls dk;kZy;ksa ds

:i esa] ftlds 80 izfr'kr ls vf/d deZpkjh&o`Un us fgUnh dk

dk;Zlk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] vf/lwfpr djrh gS %

1- dsanzh; fo|ky;] dBk;rckMk] ckxs'oj] (mÙkjk[k.M)&263642

2- dsanzh; fo|ky;] xksis'oj] ifB;ky/kj (,-,u-,e- izf'k{k.k

dsanz ds lehi)] ftyk peksyh (mÙkjk[k.M)&246401

3- dsanzh; fo|ky;] jsyos dkWyksuh] iqQysjk] ftyk&t;iqj

(jktLFkku)&303338

4- dsanzh; fo|ky;] (lh-lq-c-) jk;¯lguxj] ftyk&Jhxaxkuxj]

(jktLFkku)&335051

5- dsanzh; fo|ky;] fprjatu] ftyk&cnZoku (i- caxky)&713331

6- dsanzh; fo|ky;] vkbZ vkbZ ,e tksdk] Mk;eaM gkcZj jksM]

dksydkrk&700104

¹la- 11011&3@2014&jk-Hkk-,-º

vkj- ih- fllksfn;k] la;qDr lfpo

MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

(Department of Higher Education)

(O.L. UNIT)

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2436.—In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of rule 10

of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purposes of the

Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies

the following 6 Kendriya Vidyalayas of Kendriya Vidyalaya

Sangathan (HQ), New Delhi under the Ministry of Human

Resource Development, (Department of School Education

& Literacy) as offices, whose more than 80% members of

the staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi :

1.

Kendriya Vidyalaya, Kathayatbara, Bagheshwar

(Uttarakhand)-263642

2.

Kendriya Vidyalaya, Pathiyaldhar (Near ANM

Training Centre), Gopeshwar, Distt-Chamoli

(Uttarakhand)-246401

3.

Kendriya Vidyalaya, Railway Colony, Phulera, Distt-

Jaipur (Rajasthan)-303338

4.

Kendriya Vidyalaya, (BSF) Raisinghnagar, Distt-

Shriganganagar (Rajasthan)-335501

5.

Kendriya Vidyalaya, Chittranjan, Distt-Burdwan

(West Bengal)-713331

6.

Kendriya Vidyalaya, IIM Joka, Diamond Harbour

Road, Kolkata-700104

[No. 11011-3/2014-O.L.U.]

R. P. SISODIA, Jt. Secy.

lapkj vkSj lwpuk çkS|ksfxdh ea=kky;

(Mkd foHkkx)

ubZ fnYYkh] 4 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2437.—pwafd dsUnzh; ljdkj dk er gS fd Jh

jfo izdk'k Hkxr] duf"B ys[kkdkj ls lacaf/r foHkkxh; tk¡p ds

iz;kstu ds fy, uk;c rglhynkj ,oa dk;Zikyd n.Mkf/dkjh]

xksj[kiqj] tcyiqj] eè;izns'k dks lk{kh ds :i esa cqykus@muls dksbZ

nLrkost ysus dh vko';drk gS A

vr% foHkkxh; tk¡p (lkf{k;ksa dh mifLFkfr ds izorZu ,oa

nLrkostksa ds izLrqrhdj.k) vf/fu;e] 1972 (1972 dk 18) dh

èkkjk 4 dh mi&/kjk (1) esa iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,

dsanzh; ljdkj blds }kjk Jh vt; oqQekj] lgk;d v{kh{kd

Mkd?kj] eq[; iksLVekLVj tujy dk dk;kZy;] fnYyh ifjeaMy]

ubZ fnYyh dks uk;c rglhynkj ,oa dk;Zikyd n.Mkf/dkjh]

xksj[kiqj] tcyiqj] eè;izns'k ds laca/ esa mDr vf/fu;e dh /kjk

5 esa fofu£n"V 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, tk¡p vf/dkjh dk

izkfèkdkj iznku djrh gS A

¹la- iz'kk- III@LVkiQ@vuq'kk-@jfoº

olqfe=k] eq[; iksLVekLVj tujy

MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION AND

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

(Department of Posts)

New Delhi, the 4th September, 2014

S.O. 2437.—Whereas the Central Government is of

opinion that for the purposes of the departmental inquiry

relating to Shri Ravi Prakash Bhagat, Jr. Acctt, it is necessary

to summon as witness/call for any document form Nayab

Tehsildar evam Karyapalik Dandadhikari, Gorakhpur,

Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh.

Now therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred

by sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Deparmental Inquiries

(Enforcement of Attendance of witnesses and Production

of Documents) Act 1972 (18 of 1972) the Central Government

hereby authorizes Shri Ajay Kumar, ASP, o/o CPMG, Delhi

Circle, New Delhi as the inquiring Authority to exercise the

power specified in Section 5 of the said Act in relation to

Nayab Tehsildar evam Karyapalik Dandadhikari, gorakhpur,

Jabalpur, madhya Pradesh.

[No. Admn. III/Staff/Disc/Ravi]

VASUMITRA, Chief Postmaster General

6204

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

miHkksDrk ekeys [kk| ,oa lkoZtfud forj.k ea=kky;

(miHkksDrk ekeys foHkkx)

(Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks)

ubZ fnYYkh] 27 twu] 2014

dk-vk-

2438.—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks (izek.ku) fofu;e] 1988 ds fofu;e 4 ds mi&fofu;e (5) ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh;

ekud C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd ftuds fooj.k uhps vuqlwph esa fn, x, gSa] dks ykblsal tkjh dj fn, x, gSa %µ

vuqlwph

Øe

ykblsal la-

tkjh djus

ikVhZ dk uke vkSj irk

ekud dk 'kh"kZd

Hkk-ek- la- Hkkx [k.M

o"kZ

la-

dh frfFk

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7) (8)

(9)

1-

2883678

8 ebZ] 2014

eSllZ vk;q"k bUMLVªht]

,d isQth NksVs ,lh vkSj

996

0

0

2009

8] eoMh IykWV] jktdksV]

;wuholZy fctyh dh eksVj

xqtjkr&360004

2-

2886381

15 ebZ] 2014

eSllZ frFkZ iEi bUMLVªht]

fueTtuh; iEi lsV

8034

0

0

2002

IykWV ua- 13] egknso bUMLVªh;y

,fj;k] egknso dk¯LVx ds ihNs]

dksBkfj;k lksYoUV] dksBkjh;k]

jktdksV] xqtjkr&360002

3-

2886684

15 ebZ] 2014

eSllZ fgrs'k csosjsthl]

iSdstcUn is; ty

14543

0

0

2004

guqekuth eafnj ds ikl]

(iSdstcUn izkÑfrd

xk¡o VhaoMh] eksjoh dPN gkbZos]

feujy ty ds vykok)

rkyqdk eksjch] jktdksV]

xqtjkr&363642

4-

2886987

16 ebZ] 2014

eSllZ lkxj iksfyVsdfud fyfeVsM]

bZfe¯Vx ikbZi lhLVe

13488

0

0

2008

IykWV ua- 109 ls 111]

ckeucksj thvkbZMhlh]

rkyqdk pksVhyk] xk¡o ckeuoksj]

ftyk lqjsUnzuxj] xqtjkr&363520

5-

2887585

19 ebZ] 2014

eSllZ xhrk oqM izksMDV~l]

ydM+h ds likV njokts ds

2202

1

0

1999

lsDVj 01] ÝysV ua- 3]

'kVj Bksl dksj Vkbi (Hkkx 1]

IykWV ua- 3] lR;e vikVZesUV]

IykbZoqM ds lrg ;qDr iYys

vksLyks ldZy] xka/h/ke]

ftyk dPN] xqtjkr 370201

6-

2887484

21 ebZ] 2014

eSllZ xhrk oqM izksMDV~l]

CykWd cksMZ

1659

0

0

2004

lsDVj 01] ÝysV ua- 3]

IykWV ua- 3] lR;e vikVZesUV]

vksLyks ldZy] xka/h/ke]

ftyk dPN] xqtjkr&370201

7-

2889690

29 ebZ] 2014

eSllZ jS;kjkt bysDVªhdYl

fueTtuh; iEi lsV

8034

0

0

2002

losZ ua- 234] lgtkuan bUMLVªh;y

,LVsV] eqjyh/j os czht LVªhV]

vkft ¯jx jksM] jk"Vªh; jktekxZ 8ch]

dksBkjh;k pksdMh ds ikl]

jktdksV] xqtjkr

¹la- vkj-ch-vks-@jkti=k@2014º

la- prqosZnh] oSKkfud ^,iQ* ,oa izeq[k

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6205

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

(Bureau of Indian Standards)

New Delhi, the 27th June, 2014

S.O. 2438.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (5) of regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certificate)

Regulations, 1988, the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given below

in the following schedule :

SCHEDULE

Sl.

Licence

Grant

Name and address of

Title of the Standard

IS No.

Part Sec.

Year

No.

No.

Date

the party

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

1.

2883678

8/5/2014

M/s. Ayush Industries,

Single-phase small AC

996

0

0

2009

8-Mavdi Plot, Rajkot,

and universal electric

Gujarat-360004

motors

2.

2886381

15/5/2014

M/s. Tirth Pump Industries,

Submersible Pumpsets-

8034

0

0

2002

Plot No.-13, Mahadev Ind. Area,

Specification

B/H Mahadev Casting,

Kothariya Solvant,

Kothariya, Rajkot,

Gujarart-360002

3.

2886684

15/5/2014

M/s. Hitesh Bevrages,

Packaged Drinking

14543

0

0

2004

Near Hanumanji Temple,

Water (other than

At Timbadi,

Packaged Natural

Morbi Kachchh Highway,

Mineral Water)-

Taluka Morbi, Rajkot,

Specification

Gujarat-363642

4.

2886987

16/5/2014

M/s. Sagar Ploytechnik Limited,

Emitting pipes system

13488

0

0

2008

Plot No. 109 to 111,

Bamanbore GIDC, Taluka Chotila,

At Village Bamanbore,

District : Surendranagar,

Gujarat-363520

5.

2887585

19/5/2014

M/s. Geeta Wood Products,

Specification for wooden 2202

1

0

1999

Sector-01, Flate No. 3,

flush door shutters

Plot No. 3, Satyam Apartment,

(solid core type) :

Oslo Circle, Gandhidham,

Part 1 Plywood

District : Kachchh,

face panels

Gujarat-370201

6.

2887484

21/5/2014

M/s. Geeta Wood Products,

Specification for block

1659

0

0

2004

Sector-1, Flat No. 3, Plot No. 3,

board

Satyam Apartment, Oslo Circle,

Gandhidham, District : Kachchh,

Gujarat-370201

7.

2889690

29/5/2014

M/s. Raiyaraj Electricals,

Submersible Pumpsets-

8034

0

0

2002

S. No. 234, Sahajanand Ind. Estate, Specification

Murlidhar Way Bridge Street,

Aji Ring Road, N.H. 8-B,

Near Kothariya Chokdi,

Rajkot, Gujarat

[No. RBO/Gazette/2014]

S. CHATURVEDI, Scientist ‘F’ and Head

6206

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ubZ fnYYkh] 27 twu] 2014

dk-vk- 2439.—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks (izek.ku) fofu;e] 1988 ds fofu;e 4 ds mi&fofu;e 5 ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud

C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd ftuds fooj.k uhps vuqlwph esa fn, x, gSa] ds ykblsal jí fd, x, gSa %µ

vuqlwph

Øe

ykblsal la-

ykbZlsal/kjh dk uke ,oa irk

ykblsal ds varxZr oLrq@izØe lEc¼

lekfIr dh frfFk

la-

Hkkjrh; ekud dk 'kh"kZd

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

1-

7441772

eSllZ osYlu csosjsthl ,.M iqQM~l

iSdstcan is; ty (iSdstcUn çkÑfrd

22 ebZ] 2014

losZ ua- 96] xkao fddek]

feujy ty ds vykok)

Hkqt vatkj jksM] ftyk dPN]

vkbZ-,l- 14543 % 2004

xqtjkr&370001

¹la- lh-,e-Mh-@13 % 11º

la- prqosZnh] oSKkfud ^,iQ* ,oa izeq[k

New Delhi, the 27th June, 2014

S.O. 2439.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (6) of regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certificate)

Regulations, 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given

below have cancelled/suspended with effect from the date indicated against each :

SCHEDULE

Sl.

License No.

Name & Address of the Licensee

Article/Process with relevant Indian

Date of

No.

CM/L

Standards covered by the licence

Cancellation

cancelled/suspension

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

1.

7441772

Velson Beverages & Food

Packaged Drinking Water (other

22/05/2014

Survey No. 96, AT : Kikma,

than Packaged Natural Mineral

Bhuj Anjar Road, Taluka-Bhuj,

Water)-Specification

District : Kachchh,

Gujarat-370001

[No. CMD/13 : 11]

S. CHATURVEDI, Scientist ‘F’ and Head

ubZ fnYYkh] 29 vxLr] 2014

dk-vk-

2440.—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks fu;e 1987 ds fu;e 7 ds mifu;e (1) ds [kaM ([k) ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud

C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd uhps vuqlwph esa fn;s x;s ekud (dksa) esa la'kks/u fd;k x;k@fd;s x;s gSa A

vuqlwph

Øe la- la'kksf/r Hkkjrh; ekud (dksa) dh la[;k] o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd

la'kks/u dh la[;k vkSj frfFk

lekfIr dh frfFk

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

1-

vkbZ,l 2347 % 2006 (ikapoka iqujh{k.k)

la'kks/u la[;k 2 flrEcj] 2014

29 uoEcj] 2014

2-

vkbZ,l 2418 (Hkkx 1) % 1977 (igyk iqujh{k.k)

la'kks/u la[;k 9 tqykbZ] 2014

2 ekpZ] 2015

3-

vkbZ,l 2418 (Hkkx 2) % 1977 (igyk iqujh{k.k)

la'kks/u la[;k 4 tqykbZ] 2014

2 ekpZ] 2015

4-

vkbZ,l 9079 % 2002

la'kks/u la[;k 2 ekpZ] 2014

2 ekpZ] 2015

5-

vkbZ,l 13252 (Hkkx 1) % 2010@vkbZbZlh 60950&1 % 2005

la'kks/u la[;k 1 twu] 2014

29 vxLr] 2014

(nwljk iqujh{k.k)

6-

vkbZ,l 15907 % 2010

la'kks/u la[;k 1 ekpZ] 2014

2 ekpZ] 2015

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6207

bl Hkkjrh; ekud dh izfr;ka Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks] ekud Hkou] 9] cgknqj'kkg tiQj ekxZ] ubZ fnYyh&110002] {ks=kh; dk;kZy;ksa % ubZ

fnYyh] dksydrk] p.Mhx<+] psUubZ] eqEcbZ rFkk 'kk[kk dk;kZy;ksa % vgenkckn] caxykSj] Hkksiky] Hkqous'oj] dks;Ecrwj] xqokgkVh] gSnjkckn]

t;iqj] ukxiqj] iVuk] iw.ks rFkk dksfp esa fcØh gsrq miyC/ gSaA Hkkjrh; ekudksa dks http://www.standardsbis.in }kjk baVjusV ij [kjhnk tk

ldrk gS A

fnukad 29 vxLr] 2014

¹lanHkZ % ifCyd@th,u 2 % 2º

dyk ,e- okfj;j] funs'kd (fons'kh Hkk"kk ,oa izdk'ku)

New Delhi, the 29 August, 2014

S.O. 2440.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987,

the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given

in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :

SCHEDULE

Sl.

No. and year of the Indian Standards

No. and year of the amendment

Date from which

No.

the amendment

shall have effect

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

1.

IS 2347 : 2006 Domestic Pressure Cookers-

Amendment No. 2, September 2014

29 November, 2014

Specification (Fifth Revision)

2.

IS 2418 (Part 1) : 1977 Specification for Tubular

Amendment No. 9, July 2014

2 March, 2015

Fluorescent Lamps for General Lighting Service

Part 1 Requirement and Tests (First Revision)

3.

IS 2418 (Part 2) : 1977 Specification for Tubular

Amendment No. 4, July 2014

2 March, 2015

Fluorescent Lamps for General Lighting Service

Part 2 Standard Lamp Data Sheets (First Revision)

4.

IS 9079 : 2002 Electric Monoset Pumps for Clear

Amendment No. 2, March 2014

2 March, 2015

Cold Water for Agricultural and Water Supply

Purposes-Specification (Second Revision)

5.

IS 13252 (Part 1) : 2010/IEC 60950-1 : 2005

Amendment No. 1, June 2013

29 August, 2014

Information Technology Equipment - Safety

Part 1 General Requirements (Second Revision)

6.

IS 15907 : 2010 Agro Textiles - High Density

Amendment No. 1, March 2014

2 March, 2015

Polyethylene (HDPE) Woven Beds for

Vermiculture-Specification

Copy of these Standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur

Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002 and Regional Offices:New Delhi, Kolcatta, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also

Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Nagpur, Patna,

Pune, Kochi.On line purchase of Indian Standard can be made at :http://www.standardsbis.in.

Date : 29th August, 2014

[Ref : PUB /GN 2:2]

KALA MADHAVI VARIAR, Director (Foreign Languages & Publications)

ubZ fnYYkh] 1 vxLr] 2014

dk-vk-

2441.—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks fu;e 1987 ds fu;e 7 ds mifu;e (1) ds [kaM ([k) ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud

C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd ftu Hkkjrh; ekudksa ds fooj.k uhps vuqlwph esa fn, x, gSa] os LFkkfir gks x;s gSa A

vuqlwph

Øe

LFkkfir Hkkjrh; ekud (dksa) dh la[;k

LFkkfir frfFk

Hkkjrh; ekud(dksa) tks fd

jí gksus dh frfFk

la-

o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd

jí gksus gSa] vxj gSa] dh la[;k

o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

1-

vkbZ-,l- 1956 (Hkkx 4) % 2013 ykSg ,oa

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 1956 (Hkkx 4) % 1975

1 vxLr] 2014

bLikr ikfjHkkf"kd 'kCnkoyh Hkkx 4 LikV mRikn

(igyk iqujh{k.k)

(nwljk iqujh{k.k)

6208

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

2-

vkbZ-,l- 2796 % 2014 eksVj xSlksfyu&fof'k"V

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 2796 % 2008 (prqFkZ

1 vxLr] 2014

(ikapoka iqujh{k.k)

iqujh{k.k)

3-

vkbZ-,l- 4880 (Hkkx 7) % 2014 ikuh ds izokg

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 4880 (Hkkx 7) % 1975

1 vxLr] 2014

ds fy, lqjaxksa ds fMtkbZu dh jhfr lafgrk Hkkx 7 ]

bLikr vLrj.k okyh lajpuk fMtkbZu (igyk

iqujh{k.k)

4-

vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 5832&2 % 1999 'kY;

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 5347 (Hkkx 3) % 1996

1 vxLr] 2014

fpfdRlk ds fy, izR;kjksi.k&/krq lkexzh Hkkx 2

vfefJr VkbVsfu;e

5-

vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 5832&3 % 1996 'kY;

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 5347 (Hkkx 4) % 1996

1 vxLr] 2014

fpfdRlk ds fy, izR;kjksi.k&/krq lkexzh Hkkx 3

fiVokW VkbVsfu;e 6&,Y;qfefu;e 4&osusfM;e

feJ/krq

6-

vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 5832&5 % 2005 'kY;

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 5347 (Hkkx 6) % 1996

1 vxLr] 2014

fpfdRlk ds fy, izR;kjksi.k&/krq lkexzh Hkkx 5

fiVokW dksckYV&Øksfe;e&VaxLVu&fudy

feJ/krq

7-

vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 5832&8 % 1997 'kY;

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 5347 (Hkkx 12) % 1993

1 vxLr] 2014

fpfdRlk ds fy, izR;kjksi.k&/krq lkexzh Hkkx 8

fiVokW dksckYV&fudy&Øksfe;e&eksfycMsue

VaxLVu&yksg feJ/krq

8-

vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 5832&9 % 2007 'kY;

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 5347 (Hkkx 13) % 1997

1 vxLr] 2014

fpfdRlk ds fy, izR;kjksi.k&/krq lkexzh Hkkx 9

fiVoka mPp ukbVªkstu LVsuysl LVhy

9-

vkbZ-,l- 9549 (Hkkx 2) % 2014 iQkLVuj&

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 9549 % 1980

1 vxLr] 2014

cksYV LØw ,oa LVWM&cksYV ds gSM LykWV

(igyk iqujh{k.k)

10-

vkbZ-,l- 10980 (Hkkx 1) % 2014 vkbZ-,l-vks-

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 10980 (Hkkx 1) %

1 vxLr] 2014

5855&1 % 1999 ok;q;ku&,e ts pwfM+;ka Hkkx 1

1984

lkekU; vis{kk,a (igyk iqujh{k.k)

11-

vkbZ-,l- 12207 % 2014 Ñf"k VSªDVj&pqus gq,

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 12207 % 2007 (nwljk

1 vxLr] 2014

dk;Zdkfjrk ekin.Mksa dh fliQkfj'ksa (rhljk

iqujh{k.k)

iqujh{k.k)

12-

vkbZ-,l- 13365 (Hkkx 4) % 2014 'ky lagfr

1 vxLr] 2014

NA

NA

ek=kkRed ra=k&ekxZn'khZ fl¼kUr Hkkx 4 HkwxHkhZ;

lkeF;Z lwpdkad

13-

vkbZ-,l- 13599 % 2014 Lopy okgu&midj.k

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 13599 % 1993

1 vxLr] 2014

ra=k&rkieku xst&fo|qr ,oa bysDVªkfud izdkj&

fof'kf"V (igyk iqujh{k.k)

14-

vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 13606&3 % 2009 LokLF;

1 vxLr] 2014

NA

NA

lwpuk foKku&bysDVªkWfud LokLF; fjdkMZ lapkj

Hkkx 3 lanHkZ ewy:i vkn'kZ ,oa 'kCn lwph

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6209

15-

vkbZ-,l- 13656 % 2014 vUrnZgu batuksa ds fy,

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 13656 % 2002 (igyk

1 vxLr] 2014

ØSaddsl rsy (isVªksy vkSj Mh”ky)&fof'kf"V

iqujh{k.k)

(nwljk iqujh{k.k)

16-

vkbZ-,l- 13708 (Hkkx 1) % 2014@vkbZ-,l-vks-

1 vxLr] 2014

NA

NA

8729&1 % 2010 f'ki ,oa esjhu izkS|ksfxdh&esjhu

jMkj fjÝysDVj Hkkx 1 iSflo Vkbi (nwljk

iqujh{k.k)

17-

vkbZ-,l- 15408 % 2014@vkbZ-,l-vks- 15394 %

1 vxLr] 2014

vkbZ-,l- 15408 % 2003@

1 vxLr] 2014

2009 iSdstcanh&tgktjkuh] ifjogu vkSj xzkgh

vkbZ-,l-vks- 15394 % 2000

Lrjksa ds fy, vojks/ lafgrk vkSj f¼&vk;keh

izrhd (igyk iqujh{k.k)

18-

vkbZ-,l- 16144 % 2014 vukt HkaMkj.k

1 vxLr] 2014

NA

NA

xksnkeksa ds fy, jhfr lafgrk

19-

vkbZ-,l- 16146 % 2014 lulsV ;syks dh

1 vxLr] 2014

NA

NA

,Y;qfefu;e ysd] ,iQ lh ,iQ] [kk| xzsM&

fof'kf"V

20-

vkbZ-,l- 16172 % 2014 daØhV esa iz;qDr

1 vxLr] 2014

NA

NA

lfj;ksa ds ;kaf=kd laca/u gsrq izcyu ;qXed&

fof'kf"V

21-

vkbZ-,l- 16195 % 2014@vkbZ-,l-vks-@Vh-,l-

1 vxLr] 2014

NA

NA

15495 % 2010 nqX/] nqX/ mRikn ,oa f'k'kq

iQkewZys&,y lh&,e ,l@,e ,l }kjk esykekbu

vkSj lk;U;wfjd vEy ds ek=kkRed fu/kZj.k ds

fy, fn'kkfunsZ'k

22-

vkbZ-,l- 16219 % 2014 Lopy okgu&/krq

1 vxLr] 2014

NA

NA

dh b±/u Vadh&fof'kf"V

23-

vkbZ-,l- 16232 % 2014 ykSg izcfyr vk;ksMhuÑr 1 vxLr] 2014

NA

NA

ued&[kk| xzsM&fof'kf"V

24-

vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-bZ-lh- 60050&415 % 1999 fo|qr

1 vxLr] 2014

NA

NA

rduhdh ikfjHkkf"kd 'kCnkoyh Hkkx 415 ok;q

Vjckbu tujsVj iz.kkfy;k¡

25-

vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-bZ-lh- 61400&21 % 2008 ok;q

1 vxLr] 2014

NA

NA

Vjckbu Hkkx 21 fxzM ls tqMh ok;q Vjckbu ds

ikWoj xq.krk dk ekiu vkSj ewY;kadu

bl Hkkjrh; ekud dh izfr;ka Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks] ekud Hkou] 9] cgknqj'kkg tiQj ekxZ] ubZ fnYyh&110002] {ks=kh; dk;kZy;ksa %

ubzZ fnYyh] dksydrk] p.Mhx<+] psUubZ] eqEcbZ rFkk 'kk[kk dk;kZy;ksa % vgenkckn] caxykSj] Hkksiky] Hkqous'oj] dks;Ecrwj] xqokgkVh] gSnjkckn]

t;iqj] iVuk] iw.ks rFkk dksfp esa fcØh gsrq miyC/ gSa A Hkkjrh; ekudksa dks http://www.standardsbis.in }kjk baVjusV ij [kjhnk tk ldrk

gS A

fnukad % 01-08-2014

¹lanHkZ % ic@th,u 1 % 1º

dyk ,e- okfj;j] funs'kd (fons'kh Hkk"kk ,oa izdk'ku)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

6210

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 1st August, 2014

S.O. 2441.—In pursuance of Clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rules 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987,

the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the second

column of Schedule hereto annexed has been established on the date indicated against it in third column. The particulars of

the standards, if any, which are given in the fourth column shall also remain in force concurrently till they are cancelled on

the date indicated against them in the fifth column.

SCHEDULE

Sl.

No. & Year of the Indian Standards

Date of

No. & Year of the Indian

Date of

No.

Established

Establishment

Standards to be

cancellation

cancelled, if any

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

1.

IS 1956 (Part 4) : 2013 Glossary of Terms

01 August, 2014

IS 1956 (Part 4) : 1975

01 August, 2014

Relating to Iron and Steel - Part 4 Flat

(First Revision)

Products (Second Revision)

2.

IS 2796 : 2014 Motor Gasoline - Specification

01 August, 2014

IS 2796 : 2008

01 August, 2014

(Fifth Revision)

(Fourth Revision)

3.

IS 4880 Part 7 : 2014 Code of practice for

01 August, 2014

IS 4880 Part 7 : 1975

01 August, 2014

Design of tunnels conveying water part 7

Structural design of steel lining (First Revision)

4.

IS/ISO 5832-2 : 1999 Implants for surgery -

01 August, 2014

IS 5347 (Part 3) : 1996

01 August, 2014

Metallic materials - Part 2 : Unalloyed Titanium

5.

IS/ISO 5832-3 : 1996 Implants for surgery -

01 August, 2014

IS 5347 (Part 4) : 1996

01 August, 2014

Metallic materials Part 3: Wrought Titanium

6-Aluminium 4-Vanadium Alloy

6.

IS/ISO 5832-5 : 2005 Implants for surgery -

01 August, 2014

IS 5347 (Part 6) : 1996

01 August, 2014

Metallic materials - Part 5: Wrought Cobalt-

Chromium-Tungsten-Nickel Alloy

7.

IS/ISO 5832-8 : 1997 Implants for surgery -

01 August, 2014

IS 5347 (Part 12) : 1993

01 August, 2014

Metallic materials - Part 8 : Wrought Cobalt

Nickel-Chormium-Molybdenum-Tungsten-

Iron alloy

8.

IS/ISO 5832-9 : 2007 Implants for surgery -

01 August, 2014

IS 5347 (Part 13) : 1997

01 August, 2014

Metallic materials - Part 9 : Wrought High

Nitrogen Stainless Steel

9.

IS 9549 (Part 2) : 2014 Fasteners - Bolts,

01 August, 2014

IS 9549 : 1980

01 August, 2014

Screws and Studs - Head Slots for Bolts

(First Revision)

10.

IS 10980(Part 1) : 2014/ISO 5855-1 : 1999

01 August, 2014

IS 10980 (Part 1) : 1984

01 August, 2014

Aerospace - MJ threads Part 1 General

requirements (First Revision)

11.

IS 12207 : 2014 Agriculture Tractors -

01 August, 2014

IS 12207 : 2007

01 August, 2014

Recommendations on selected performance

(Second Revision)

Characteristics (Third Revision)

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6211

12.

IS 13365 (Part 4) : 2014 Quantitative Classification

01 August, 2014

NA

NA

of Rock Mass - Guidelines Part 4 Geological

Strength Index (GSI)

13.

IS 13599 : 2014 Automotive Vehicles - Instrument

01 August, 2014

IS 13599 : 1993

01 August, 2014

Systems - Temperature Gauges - Electrical and

Electronic Type - Specification (First Revision)

14.

IS/ISO 13606-3 : 2009 Health Informatics - Electronic 01 August, 2014

NA

NA

Health Record Communication Part 3 References

Archetypes and term Lists

15.

IS 13656 : 2014 Internal Combustion Engine

01 August, 2014

IS 13656 : 2002

01 August, 2014

Crankcase Oils for Automotive Application

(First Revision)

(Diesel & Gasoline) - Specification (Second

Revision)

16.

IS 13708 (Part 1) : 2014 / ISO 8729-1 : 2010 Ships

01 August, 2014

NA

NA

and Marine Technology - Marine Radar Reflectors :

Part 1 Passive Type (Second Revision)

17.

IS 15408 : 2014/ ISO 15394 : 2009 Packaging - Bar

01 August, 2014

IS 15408 : 2003 /

01 August, 2014

Code and Two - Dimensional Symbols for Shipping

ISO 15394 : 2000

Transport and Receiving labels (First Revision)

18.

IS 16144 : 2014 Foodgrain Storage Godowns -

01 August, 2014

NA

NA

Code of Practice

19.

IS 16146 : 2014 Aluminium Lake of Sunset Yellow

01 August, 2014

NA

NA

FCF Food Grade – Specification

20.

IS 16172 : 2014 Reinforcement Couplers for

01 August, 2014

NA

NA

Mechanical Splices of Bars in Concrete -

Specification

21.

IS 16195 : 2014 /ISO/TS 15495 : 2010 Milk,

01 August, 2014

NA

NA

Milk Products And Infant Formulae - Guidelines

for the Quantitative Determination of Melamine

and Cyanuric Acid by LC-MS/MS

22.

IS 16219 : 2014 Automotive Vehicles - Metallic

01 August, 2014

NA

NA

Fuel Tanks – Specification

23.

IS 16232 : 2014 Iron Fortified Iodized Salt (Double

01 August, 2014

NA

NA

Fortified Salt) - Food Grade – Specification

24.

IS/IEC 60050-415 : 1999 Electrotechnical Vocabulary 01 August, 2014

NA

NA

Part 415 Wind Turbine Generator Systems

25.

IS/IEC 61400-21 : 2008 Wind Turbines Part 21

01 August, 2014

NA

NA

Measurement and Assessment of Power Quality

Characteristics of Grid Connected Wind Turbines

Copies of these standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur

Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi – 110002 and Regional Offices : Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch

Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune,

Kochi.

Date : 1-8-2014

[Ref : PUB/GN-1 : 1]

KALA M. VARIAR, Director (Foreign Languages & Publications)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

6212

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Je vkSj jkstxkj ea=kky;

ubZ fnYYkh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk-

2442.—dsUnz ljdkj] jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh;

iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 (;Fkkla'kksfèkr] 1987) ds

fu;e 10 ds mi&fu;e (4) ds vuqlj.k esa] Je vkSj jkstxkj

ea=kky; ds iz'kkldh; fu;a=k.kkèkhu fuEufyf[kr dk;kZy;ksa dks]

ftuds 80 izfr'kr ls vfèkd deZpkfj;ksa us fgUnh dk dk;Zlkèkd

Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] ,rn~}kjk vfèklwfpr djrh gS %

1- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] deZpkjh jkT; chek fuxe] vEckyk

2- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] deZpkjh jkT; chek fuxe] ejksy

3- 'kk[kk dk;kZy;] deZpkjh jkT; chek fuxe] deZiqjk

4- dk;kZy; vij dsUnzh; Hkfo"; fufèk vk;qDr] (gfj;k.kk ,oa

jktLFkku)] iQjhnkckn

5- dk;kZy; vij dsUnzh; Hkfo"; fufèk vk;qDr] (xqtjkr ,oa

eè; izns'k)] vgenkckn

6- dk;kZy; vij dsUnzh; Hkfo"; fufèk vk;qDr] (egkjk"Vª ,oa

NÙkhlx<+)] eqacbZ&1`

7- dk;kZy; vij dsUnzh; Hkfo"; fufèk vk;qDr] (dukZVd ,oa

xksok)] caxykSj

8- vkapfyd izf'k{k.k laLFkku (mÙkj {ks=k)] d-Hk-fu-la-]

iQjhnkckn

9- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] bykgkckn (mÙkj izns'k)

10- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] f'koeksxk (dukZVd)

11- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] fpDdeaxywj (dukZVd)

12- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] csYykjh (dukZVd)

13- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] eSlwj jksM (dukZVd)

14- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] ds-vkj- iqje (caxykSj)

15- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] oqQDdViYyh] (gSnjkckn)

¹la- bZ&11017@1@2006&jk-Hkk-uh-º

,-osQ- i.Mk] vk£Fkd lykgdkj

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O.

2442.—In pursuance of Sub-Rule (4) of Rule

10 of the Official Languages (Use for official purposes of

the Union) Rules, 1976 (as amended, 1987) the Central

Government hereby notifies following offices under the

administrative control of the Ministry of Labour and

Employment, more than 80% Staff whereof have acquired

working knowledge of Hindi :—

1. Sub Regional Office, ESIC, Ambala

2. Sub Regional Office, ESIC, Marol

3. Branch Office, ESIC, Karmpura

4. Office of Additional Central P.F. Comm., (Haryana

and Rajasthan), Faridabad

5. Office of Additional Central P.F. Comm., (Gujrat and

Madhya Pradesh), Ahmedabad

6. Office of Additional Central P.F. Comm., (Maharastra

and Chhattisgarh), Mumbai-1

7. Office of Additional Central P.F. Comm., (Karnatak

and Goa), Bangalore

8. Zonal Training Istitute (North Zone), EPFO,

Faridabad

9. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Allahabad, (UP)

10. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Shivmoga (Karnatak)

11. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Chikkmangalore (Karnatak)

12. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Bellari (Karnatak)

13. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Mysore Road (Karnatak)

14. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, K.R. Puram (Bangalore)

15. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Kukkatpalli (Hyderabad)

[No. E-11017/1/2006-RBN]

A. K. PANDA, Economic Adviser

ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2443-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk

esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je

U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 64@2008) dks

izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk

FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@91@2008&vkbZ-vkj- (lh,e&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014

S.O. 2443.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 64/2008)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No

1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/91/2008-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 1), DHANBAD

In the Matter of A Reference U/S 10(1) (D) (2A) of

I.D. Act, 1947.

Ref. No. 64 of 2008

Employers in relation to the management of

Sijua Area of M/s. BCCL

AND

Their workmen

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6213

Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding officer

Appearances:

For the Employers

: Sri D.K.Verma, Advocate

For the workman

: Sri R.R.Ram, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal.

Dated. 28 /07/2014

AWARD.

By Order No.L-20012/91/2008-IR -(CM-I), dated

18/12/2008, the Central Government in the Ministry of

Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause

(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10

of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following

disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of Sendra

Bansjora Colliery under Sijua Area of M/s. BCCL in

dismissing Shri Jageshwar Bhuia, Miner/Loader from

the services of the company w.e.f. 20.08.2004 is legal

and justified? (ii) To what relief is the concerned

workman entitled?”

2.

The case is received from the Ministry of Labour on

29.12.2008. After receipt of reference , both parties are

noticed, the Sponsoring Union files their written statement

on 04/01/12. And the management files their written

statement -cum-rejoinder on 04.12.2012. The point involved

in the reference is that the workman has been dismissed

from his services on absenteeism ground .

3.

During preliminary hearing it is revealed that, this

case is dismissal of workman for long absence on duty.

He has already out of service for 10 years. It is felt to give

another chance to the workman to serve.

4.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case,

I hold that he be taken into job as a fresh employee. But

the workman be kept under probation for a period two

year. At the time of appointment his identity is to be

scrutinised by the management. Therefore the question

of back wages does not arise at all.

This is my award.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2444-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj lh-lh-,y- ds

izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa

fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je

U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 67@2008) dks

izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk

FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@69@2004&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014

S.O. 2444.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 67/2008)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

No. 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. CCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/69/2004-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD.

In the matter of reference U/S. 10 (1) (d) (2A) of

I.D.Act, 1947

Ref. No. 67 of 2004

Employer in relation to the management of

Karo O.C.P M/s. CCL

AND

Their workmen.

Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer.

Appearances :

For the Employers

: Sri D.K.Verma, Advocate

For the workman

: Sri S.N. Goswami, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated 24/7/2014

AWARD

By Order No.L-20012/69/2004-IR (CM-I), dated.Nil,

the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in

exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-

section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following

disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the demand of Hind Mazdoor Kishan

Panchayat from the management of Karo OCP of

M/s. CCL for promotion of Sri Sonu Ram Mahato ,

Shoval Operator Grade-II/B w.e.f. 27.7.1988 and

Grade-I/A w.e.f. 27.7.89 is legal and justified? If so,

to what relief the workman concerned is entitled to?”

2.

This Case is received from the Ministry of Labour &

Employment on 12.07.2004. After receipt of reference, both

parties are noticed. The workman files their written

statement on 27.12.2004. The management files their written

statement on 31.03.2005. One witness each has been

examined from both side.

3.

The short point to be decided in this reference is ,

whether the concerned workman will get promotional scale

so also grade at par with his junior Daya Shankar Singh

who is in higher in scale than the concerned workman.

6214

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

4.

The case of the workman is that he alongwith Daya

Shankar completed training as Shoval Operator and passed

the training and Daya Shankar Singh has been given higher

grade debarring the present workman.

5.

On the other hand the management in his counter

submitted that the workman did not file his pass certificate

of Shovel Operator for which his case has not been

considered.

6.

Therefore it is ordered that the workman to file his

trainee pass certificate before the authority and the

authority after receipt of the same consider and give proper

grade to the workman .

This is my award.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2445-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

53@1992) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@204@1991&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014

S.O. 2445.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 53/1992)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No

1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/204/1991-IR (C-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD.

In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A)

of I.D.Act, 1974

Ref. No. 53 of 1992

Employer in relation to the management

of Moonidih Area, M/s. BCCL,

AND

Their workmen.

Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer.

Appearances :

For the Employers

: None

For the workman

: None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal.

Dated 28/07/2014

AWARD

By Order No.L-20012/204/1991-IR (C-I), dated

20/07/1992, the Central Government in the Ministry of

Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause

(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10

of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following

disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of M/s. Bharat

Coking Coal Ltd., Koyla Bhawan, Dhanbad in

denying promotion to all the 28 Foremen

(Mechanical) as mentioned in the annexure as per

their old Seniority and old promotional policy of the

above management is justified? If not , to what relief

the above workmen are entitled and from what date?”

Sl. No.

Name of workman

1.

Shri Tripurari Bandopadhya

2.

Sri S.L.P.Singh.

3.

Shri Sarbeswar Banerjee

4.

Sri Prasanta Kumar Mitra

5.

Shri K. K. Kachahe

6.

Sri K.B. Roy

7.

Shri Ramesh Pandit

8.

Sri S. D. Ram

9.

Shri U. S. Singh

10.

Shri H. L. Manjhi

11.

Shri G. P. Sahay

12.

Sri N. K. Prasad

13.

Shri Jitendra Kumar

14.

Shri Soumitra Bakshi

15.

Shri D.K.Chatopadhyay

16.

Shri Anil Gorai

17.

Shri M.K.Choudhary

18.

Sri V.K. Chourasia

19.

Sri N. K. Viswakarma

20.

Shri B.D. Mishra

21.

Shri S.K.Lahira

22.

Shri Mahimanand Sharma

23.

Shri Mondal Pharindra Chandra

24.

Shri Narendra Prasad

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6215

25.

Sri S. K. Roy

26.

Shri T. K. Das

27.

Md. Jamil Ahmad

28.

Sri Seo Shankar Yadav.

2.

After receipt of the reference, parties are noticed,

Though they took steps for certain dates, the management

and workman examined two evidence each and marked

document as exhibits. But subsequently the parties did

not appear nor take any interest in the case. It is presumed

that the disputes between the parties have resolved in

the meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is passed.

This is my award.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2446-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 30@

2005) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014 dks

izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@223@2004&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014

S.O. 2446.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 30 of

2005) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

No. 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/223/2004-IR (C-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 1), DHANBAD.

In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A)

of I.D. Act. 1974

LOK ADALAT

Ref. No. 30 of 2005

Employers in relation to the management

of Katras Area, M/S BCCL

AND

Their workmen

Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding officer

Appearances :

For the Employers

: Shri D.K.Verma, Advocate

For the workman

: Shri K.N.singh, Rep.

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated. 14/7/2014

AWARD

By Order No.L-20012/223/2004-IR (C-I), dated

31/03/2005, the Central Government in the Ministry of

Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause

(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10

of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following

disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“ Whether the demand of the Janta Mazdoor Sangh

from the management of BCCL Katras Area that

Shri Ram Lal , Miner Loader may be regularized as

Dresser/Compounder is justified? If so, to what relief

is the workman entitled and from what date?

2.

The case is received from the Ministry of Labour on

25.04.2005. The workman files their written statement on

13.06.2005. Thereafter the management files their written

statement on 14.09.2005 , Document and rejoinder is also

filed by the workman. Workman examined himself as

WW-1.

3.

During the pendency of this case the dispute

between the parties settled and order of regularization

already filed in court. The said copy along with the award

is submitted.

This is my award.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2447-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

192@2001) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@147@2001&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014

S.O. 2447.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 192/

2001) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

6216

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/147/2001-IR (C-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2), AT DHANBAD

PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer.

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section

10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947

REFERENCE No. 192 OF 2001

PARTIES

: The Orgn.Secretary,

National Coal Workers Congress,

SE.M. 7/144, Mathigarh,

Dam Colony, PO : Nudkhurkee, Dhanbad

Vs.

General Manager,

Western Jharia Area of M/s. BCCL,

PO : Moonidih, Dhanbad.

Order No. L-20012/147/2001-IR(C-I) dt.10.07.2001

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of the Workman/Union : None

On behalf of the Management

: Mr. D. K. Verma,

Ld. Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated, Dhanbad, the 30th July, 2014

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in

exercise of the powers conferred on them under

Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947 has referred the following

dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order

No. L-20012/147/2001-IR(C-I) dt.10.07.2001

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the Management to dismiss

the services of Sri Sheo Prasad Sahu of Lohapatti

Colliery under Western Jharia Area w.e.f. 16.3.2000

is justified, legal and proper? If not, to what relief is

the concerned workman entitled ?

2.

Neither the Representative for the National Coal

Workers. SE.M.7/144, Mathigarh, Dam Colony, Nudkhurkee,

Dhanbad nor workman Sheo Pd. Sahu appeared despite

registered notices as a last chance for his appearance. But

Mr. D. K. Verma, Ld. Advocate for the O.P./Management

is present. No Management witness for the O.P. at the

preliminary point produced.

From the perusal of the case record, It appears

neither the Union Representative nor the workman has

appeared since 29.7.2013. Both of them by their conduct

appear to be uninterested to pursue their case despite the

Registered Notices having been issued on 27.5.2013,

26.12.2013 and 28.03.2014.

Under these circumstances, the Reference related

to an issue over the dismissal of the workman is closed as

‘No Industrial Dispute’ existent. Accordingly an order of

“No Industrial Dispute” is passed.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2448-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

69@2005) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@18@2005&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014

S.O. 2448.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 69/2005)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/18/2005-IR (C-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2), AT DHANBAD

PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under

Section 10(1)(d) of the I.D.Act,1947.

REFERENCE NO 69 OF 2005

PARTIES

: The Working President,

Janta Mazdoor Sangh,

B-25, Murlidih, 20/21 Pits,

PO Mahuda, Dhanbad

Vs.

The General Manager,

W.W.Zone of Mahuda of

M/s. BCCL, PO : Mahuda, Dhanbad.

Order No. L-20012/18/2005-IR(C-I) dt.19.07.2005

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6217

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of the Workman/Union : Mr. S. C. Gaur,

Ld. Advocate

On behalf of the Management

: Mr. U. N. Lal,

Ld. Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated, Dhanbad, the 25th July, 2014

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in

exercise of the powers conferred on them under

Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947 has referred the following

dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order

No. L-20012/18/2005-IR(C-I) dt.19.07.2005

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the Management of

Moonidih Coal Washery of M/s BCCL in not

correcting the date of birth of Sri Naresh Paswan as

15.11.68 instead of 15.5.1955 is justified? If not, to

what relief is the concerned workman entitled?”

On receipt of the Order No. L-20012/18/2005-IR(C-I)

dt.19.07.2005 of the above mentioned reference from the

Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment,

New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference

Case No. 69 of 2005 was registered on 19th August, 2005

and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to

issue notices through the Registered Posts to the parties

concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the

date fixed, and to file their written statements along with

the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order,

notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties

concerned.

Both the parties made their appearances and filed

their pleadings and photocopies of their documents. The

workman and the O.P./Management through their Lawyers

appeared in, and contested the case.

2.

The case of petitioner Naresh Paswan as sponsored

by the Janta Mazdoor Sangh is that while his appointment

as the workman of Moonidih Coal Washery on 23.12.1989,

his age was recorded as 15.11.1968 as his date of birth

(DoB) in his declaration and Identification in the prescribed

proforma of the BCCL,but the Management of the said

Washery recorded his date of birth as 15.5.1955 instead of

15.11.1968 in his form ‘B’ Record without any authentic

document, though he had submitted his Admit Card and

Mark Sheet of Bihar School Examination Board, and the

Certificate issued by S.B. High School, Bhaga, Dhanbad

for correcting of his DoB as per his application

dt.13.07.2004,but the Management as per their letter

No.1982 dt.10.08.2004 refused to correct it by not

considering his Pan Card and L.I.C. bearing his date of

birth as 15.11.1968.

Further, it is alleged that the petitioner Workman

was medically examined by the Medical Board on

14.11.1989 before his aforesaid employment, but the age

column of the Form ‘O’ rule 29(F) (2) and 29 (L) of the

Medical Report was unfilled by the members of the Medical

Board which was treated as “No age assessed afresh”.

His service excerpt duly checked and signed by the

Personnel Manager of the said Washery and the workman

was left blank under its column of date of birth. When the

workmen petitioner wanted to fill up his age in the column

of it, he was not allowed by the Management to do so.

The Management failed to produce any documents

concerned related to his Date of Birth 15.5.1955 as recorded

in course of the conciliation proceeding as sponsored by

the Union before the ALC©,and on its failure resulted in

the reference for an adjudication. Due to the wrongly

recording of his date of birth by the Management in their

record, the workman/petitioner would superannuate on

14.5.2015, 13 years before his actual superannuation on

14.11.2028 at 60 years of his age. The malafide action of

the Management of the said washery was illegal,

unjustified and unfair labour practice. So the workman

petitioner is entitled to correction of his aforesaid age

under the provision of I.I. No.76 of the J.B.C.C.I. of the

National Coal Wages Board Agreement.

3.

The Union concerned in its rejoinder for the

petitioner has categorically denied all the allegations of

the O.P./Management.

4.

On the other hand, categorically denying all the

allegations of the workman petitioner, the case of the O.P./

Management is that Sri Naresh Paswan was appointed as

Auto Fitter Helper w.e.f. 23.12.1989 as per the offer of

appointment No.5055 (A) dt.4.9.1989. He was transferred

from other unit to Moonidih Coal Washery. As per his

L.P.C., Form ‘B’, NEIS etc., his date of birth was recorded

as 15.5.1955 which was correct. The Management as per

the letter dt.10.8.2004 of the Project Officer, Moonidih Coal

Washery had accordingly replied him about his aforesaid

date of birth as correct. The action of the Management of

the said washery, M/s. BCCL is correct and fair. The claim

of the petitioner for rectification of his Date of birth as

15.11.1968 at later stage is neither just nor viable as per

policy and decision of the Management.

In the rejoinder, the O.P./Management has

specifically alleged that all those documents of the

workman concerned are not of the time of his joining the

service, were not referred by him at the relevant time, rather,

he submitted a copy of the Marks Sheet which was

obtained from the Bihar School Examination Board on

14.9.2004. It is not reasonable. The date of his birth as

recorded in the Statutory record is to be treated as perfectly

in order and it is acceptable to all. Accordingly, the workman

would retire at his age of 60 years as per his record and in

the Form’B’ which is the mother record of the Company.

FINDING WITH REASONS

5.

In the instant reference,WWI Naresh Paswan, the

workman petitioner himself for the Union concerned, MWI

Anna Bhauwra, the Chief Manager (Pers.), Mahuda

6218

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Washery Zone, and MW2 Sanjeev Kumar, the Sr. Clerk of

the said Washery of the O.P./Management have been

respectively examined.

Mr. S.C. Gaur, the Learned Counsel for the petitioner

as per his written argument as well submitted that the

appointment of the workman to the post of Auto Fitter

Helper and his report with a direction to report the G.M.,

Moonidih Area for his duty as per the appointment Letter

dt.4.9.1989 and the Office Order dt.01.1.1990 (Extt.W.1 and

2 respectively) are indisputable; his service particulars

including his Date of birth as 15.11.1968 was filed in the

Form- B of the Moonidih Project as per the provision u/s

48 of the Mines Act, 1952; on his transfer to Moonidih

Coal Washery, the Service Excerpt and Identity Card (Exts.

3 & 6/1 respectively) issued by the Management to him

show his Date of Birth as 15.11.1968, but statement of

MW2 over the entry of Date of Birth as improper suggests

the recording of his Date of Birth was not correct. But the

Service Excerpt (Ext.W.3) of the workman refers to the blank

against the column no.6 (1) of his Date of Birth. According

to Mr. Gaur, the Learned Counsel for the workman, the

Management has intentionally not produced the original

Form B of the Moonidih Project related to the workman’s

initial appointment and service particulars including his

Date of Birth as 25.11.1968;in such situation, the date of

birth recorded in the School Leaving Certificate which is

not be altered under any circumstances as per the

Mandatory Implementation Instruction No.76 dt.25th

April,1988 of the NCWA- III, so the DoB of the workman

as recorded in his Identity Card, his School Leaving Papers

& Pan Card (Exts. W.6/1, 4/1 and 6 respectively) is correct,

but any other age secretly recorded by the Management

can not taken as a certain proof of recording his correct

Date of Birth which was willingly done with a view to

retire him 13 years prior to actual superannuation; and the

action of the Management in not correcting the wrong

Date of Birth of the workman is illegal and unjustified, so

the workman is entitled to recording his Date of Birth as

above as per his document (Ext.W.6/1) in particular.

6.

Whereas the contention of Mr.U.N.Lal, Learned

Advocate for the OP/Management, as per his written

argument as well is that though the Service Excerpt

(Ext.M.1) of the workman bears blank against its column

No.6 (1) of date of birth just as the Certified Copy of Identity

Card under Sl.No. 718 of the Form B, issued on 28.08.1990

(Ext.M.7 with objection) he did not raise any objection

and his present Identity Card (Ext.6/1) is dt.11.12.2006

which is quite different. On his transfer to Moonidih in the

year 1990 as per his LPC (Ext.M.3) his Form ‘B’(Ext.M.2)

proves his age as 15.05.1955 against its column No.4 under

the signature of the workman as well, and accordingly, the

sheet of the date maintained in the NEIS dt.06.05.1994 under

the signature of the Personnel Manager of aforesaid Coal

Washery (Ext.M.6) shows his aforesaid date of birth. The

Project Officer of the Washery as per the letter dt.2.8.2004

to the workman as also the letter dt.8.11.2004 to the

A.L.C.(C), Dhanbad (Exts. M. 4 and 5 respectively) had

communicated about the date of birth of the workman as

15.05.1955 as correct, so his prayer for its correction was

refused; moreover the statement of MWI Aruna Bhauwra

proves no variation in the date of birth of the workman in

the statutory records of the Company, so the claim of the

workman for correction of his Date of Birth is baseless.

7.

Having gone through all the materials as brought

by both the portion on the case record, I find that it is the

settled law as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the

case of Awadh Singh Vs. M/s B.C.C.L. reported in 2005 (3)

JWJR.209 (DB) that “There is no dispute that under the

Implementation Instruction No.76, the Age determination

is to be done at the time of appointment firstly on the

basis of Matriculation Certificate, if available. In fact, the

said Instruction indicates that in the case of appointees

who have passed Matriculation or equivalent examination,

the date of birth recorded in the said Certificate shall be

treated as correct date of birth and the same cannot be

altered under any circumstances.(Para -6)”.

But the main decisive factor evolves whether the

workman/applicant had submitted his School Certificate

even of his failure at the time of his appointment. The

answer comes negative as apparent from his documents

of Transfer Certificate, photocopy of Bihar School

Examination Board and Marks Sheet dt.14.09.2004 (Ext.W.4

series)which were palpably antidatedly obtained much later

than his appointment in the year 1989, and his claim for

correction of Date of Birth as 15.11.1968 started since 2004.

So far as the Identity Card of the workman (Ext.W.6/1)

over which he has finally relied is concerned, it also seems

evidently tampered with its date, hence it is a concocted

one against his original Date of Birth as 15.05.1955 as

maintained the statutory records of the O.P./Management.

In result, it is hereby, in the terms of the reference

responded and awarded that the action of the Management

of Moonidih Coal Washery of M/s BCCL in not correcting

the date of birth of Sri Naresh Paswan as 15.11.1968 instead

of 15.5.55 is quite legal and justified. The workman

concerned is not entitled to any relief whatsoever.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2449-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

29@2000) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@312@1999&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6219

New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014

S.O. 2449.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 29/2000)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/312/1999-IR (C-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD

PRESENT : Shri KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under

Section 10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act, 1947

REFERENCE NO. 29 OF 2000

PARTIES

: Shri Dilip Chakraborty,

Area Secretary,

Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union,

At/PO: Bhowra, Distt; Dhanbad,

Vs.

The Project Officer,

Bhowra (N) Colliery, PO: Bhowra,

Distt. Dhanbad

Ministry’s Order No. L-20012/312/99-IR (C-I) dt.28.1.2000

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of the Workman/Union : Mr. S.N. Goswami,

Ld. Advocate

On behalf of the Management

: None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated, Dhanbad, the 14th July, 2014

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in

exercise of the powers conferred on them under

Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947 has referred the following

dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their

Ministry’s Order No. L-20012/312/99-IR (C-I) dt.28.1.2000.

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the Management of Bhowra

(N) Colliery of the M/s BCCL in dismissing Sri Hiroo

Turi from the services of the company w.e.f.

26.10.1996 is justified? If not, to what reliefs the

workman is entitled to?”

On receipt of the Order No. L-20012/312/99-IR(C-I)

dt.28.1.2000 of the above mentioned reference from the

Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment,

New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference

Case No. 29/2000 was registered on 01.03.2000 and

accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue

notices through the Registered Posts to the parties

concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the

date fixed, and to file their written statements along with

the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order,

notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties

concerned.

Both the parties made their appearances and filed

their pleadings and photocopies of their documents. The

Union and the O.P./Management through their Advocates

and contested the case, respectively.

2.

The case of the sponsoring Bihar Colliery Kamgar

Union, Bhowra for workman Hiroo Turi is that he is a

permanent employee of Bhowra U.G. Mine Colliery, Bhowra

Area No. XI of M/s. BCCL. He has been unblemishedly

working as D.C.Loader. Due to his illness of Jaundice, he

had been under treatment as being in beyond control

circumstances, he could not report his duty w.e.f. 16.3.1996.

On his recovery from his ailment, when he submitted his

Medical Certificate to report his duty, he was not allowed

to join his duty, so he remained idle since then. He was

issued the charge sheet dt.21.6.1996 for his unauthorised

absence from duty under clause 26.1.1 and 26.1.10 of the

Certified Standing Order of M/s BCCL. He submitted his

explanation of illness beyond his control, yet the

departmental enquiry was hastily and biasedly conducted

by the Management without giving his reasonable

opportunity for defence against the principle of natural

justice, as also no copy of the enquiry proceeding was

supplied to him. The report of the Enquiry Officer was

perverse, and the order of his dismissal dt.26.10.1996 based

on it was disproportionate and not commensurate with

the misconduct, so liable to be set aside. He also submitted

his appeal to the Management for resumption of his duty,

but of no effect. The action of the Management in

dismissing the workman is not justified. The workman is

entitled to reinstatement in service with full back wages

and other consequential benefits.

3.

The workman in his rejoinder on his behalf itself has

categorically denied the allegations of the O.P./

Management, further alleging that the Project Officer is

neither the Appointing Authority nor the Disciplinary

Authority, so the issuance of the chargesheet and the

appointment of the Enquiry Officer are beyond his

jurisdiction. Besides, the transfer of the workman from

Govindpur Colliery beyond 15 kms. And providing him no

House Accommodation even on several requests are

against the principle of natural justice.

4.

Whereas with specific denials the case of the O.P./

Management is that the workman employed as D.C.L. at

Bhowra (N), U.G. Mines of BCCL. He was issued the

chargesheet dt.21.6.1996 for conduct of unauthorized

absence from 14.10.1992 under clauses 26.1.1 and 26.1.10

6220

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

of the Certified Standing Order of the Company. On finding

his reply unsatisfactory, the enquiry was conducted by

the Enquiry Officer on the charges against him. The

workman participated in the enquiry, and was given full

opportunity for his defence. It was fairly held in accordance

with principle of natural justice. The Enquiry Office found

the charges fully proved against the workman, so he was

furnished with the enquiry report. He was dismissed from

the services as per the letter dt.25/26.10.1996 with the

approval of the competent authority. The workman was a

habitual absentee as also his last three year’s attendances

146, 44 and 137 days in the years 1993 to 1995 respectively

were extremely poor, so the dismissal order of the

Management towards the workman is fully justified.

Accordingly as a token of punishment, the workman

was converted as “BADLI LOADER” as a minor

punishment in place of dismissing from the services, as

per the letter No.324 dt.27.3.1993. In the year 1994, he was

also suspended from 28.2.1994 to 10.03.1994 as per letter

No.59 dt.10.03.94 as a token of punishment for unauthorized

absence from duty, for which he had begged his apology.

Likewise, he was also suspended from 26.4.1995 to 8.5.1995

for his unauthorized absence as per the letter No.97

dt.8.5.1995.In spite of the lenient views taken by the O.P./

Management, the workman did not himself improve, so

the Management finally dismissed him from the services

of the Company as per the letter No.1432 dt.26.10.1996.It

has been prayed for the opportunity to prove the enquiry

on merits, in case the enquiry found unfair and improper

at the preliminary issue.

FINDING WITH REASONS

5.

In the instant reference, at the preliminary issue, the

Tribunal as per the Order No. 18 dt. 21.10.2005 has declared

the domestic enquiry as fair, proper and according to the

principle of natural justice. It result, it came up for hearing

the final argument of both the parties on merits.

Mr. S. N. Goswami, Ld. Advocate for the workman

as per his written argument as well submits that the

workman Hiroo Turi was undoubtedly a permanent

employee as D.C. Loader of Bhowra North Colliery of M/

s. BCCL; but due to the illness of his jaundice, he could

not attend his duty from16.3.1996 to 28.09.1996 during

which he had been under treatment; though the workman

had submitted his explanation to the chargesheet on 28th

Sept. 1996 (Ext. M.2/1) that due to suffering from jaundice

beyond the control of the circumstances he could not

report his duty; moreover he used to attend his duty from

his village 25 kms. away, as he was not given any quarter

for accommodation. Further it is submitted on behalf of

the workman despite his satisfactory reply, the

Management got the departmental enquiry conducted by

the Enquiry Officer hastily within two days; therefter he

was dismissed as per the letter dt.25./26.10.1996 (Ext.M.7)

on the basis of the Enquiry Report dt.15.10.1996 (Ext.M.6);

though the workman had also filed an appeal but in vain;

his dismissal from the service for merely absentism was

quite illegal and harsh for him; moreover, his justified

absence does not cause any loss of his lien in employment,

as such the action of the Management in dismissing the

workman is totally unjustified.

In the instant case neither any authorized Lawyer /

Representative appeared on behalf of the O.P./

Management for argument on merits.

On perusal and consideration of the materials

available on the case records, I find that the workman was

already put in ‘Badli Roll’ in view of his regular absentism

from his duty earlier. In the regular case, the workman

appears to have justified his absence from his duty due to

illness of jaundice which was beyond his control. Under

these circumstances, the dismissal of the workman appears

to be not only harsh but also disproportionate to nature

of his absentism.

Under these circumstances, it is hereby awarded

that the action of the Management of Bhowra (North)

Colliery of M/s. BCCL in dismissing the workman Hiroo

Turi from the services of the Company w.e.f.26.10.1996 is

injustified.It is liable to be set aside. So the workman is

entitled to his reinstatement in his service but without

back wages.

The O.P./Management is directed to implement the

Award within one month from the date of receipt of its

copy of the award following its publication in the Gazette

of India.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2450-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj lh-lh-,y- ds

izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk

esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je

U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 132@2001) dks

izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk

Fkk A

¹la- ,y&20012@199@1999&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014

S.O. 2450.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 132/

2001) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. CCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/199/1999-IR (C-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6221

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2), AT DHANBAD

PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section

10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947

REFERENCE NO. 132 OF 2001

PARTIES : The Area Secretary,

B.C.W.Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union,

PO : Kathara, Dist;Bokaro

Project Officer,

Swang Washery, of M/s. CCL,

PO : Swang, Distt; Bokaro

Order No. L-20012/199/99 C-I dt.8.5.2001

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of the workman/Union : Mr. D. Mukherjee,

Ld. Advocate

On behalf of the Management

: Mr. D.K. Verma,

Ld. Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated, Dhanbad, the 31stJuly, 2014.

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in

exercise of the powers conferred on them under

Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act.,1947 has referred the following

dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order

No. L-20012/199/99C-I dt.8.5.2001

SCHEDULE

“Whether the demand of the Bihar Colliery Kamgar

Union from the Management of Swang Washery of

M/s. C.C.L. for treating Shri Mithalesh Prasad and

18 others as per the list as regular workmen and for

payment of wage as per N.C.W.A. is legal and

justified? If so, what relief the concerned workmen

are entitled to, and from which date. ?”

On receipt of the Order No. L-20012/199/99C-I

dt.8.5.2001 of the above mentioned reference from the

Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment,

New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference

Case No. 132/2001 of was registered on 30.05.2001 and

accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue

notices through the Registered Posts to the parties

concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the

date fixed, and to file their written statements along with

the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order,

notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties

concerned.

Both the parties made their appearances and filed

their pleadings and photocopies of their documents. The

Union and the O.P./Management contested the case,

respectively.

2.

The case of workmen Mithalesh Prasad and 18

others as per the list as sponsored by the Bihar Colliery

Kamgar Union,Jarandih is that they have been performing

the job of repair,changing cleaning of track, maintenance

of plant cleaning which are of permanent nature and

prohibited category in the Railway Yard of the Swang

Colliery since 1990, directly under the control and

supervision of the Management, by putting in more then

240 days attendance in each calendar year. The

Management supplied all the implements for execution of

the job. Since they have been producing goods by their

service for the benefit of the Management, they are the

employees of the Management for all practical purposes

at the payment of wages, much below the rate of NCWA

through different intermediaries, which is a legal

camouflage, as per all the papers arrangement to conceal

the real fact in order to exploit the poor workmen. They

several times represented to the Management for

regularization and payment of wage as per NCWA, but of

no effect. The Union raised the Industrial Dispute before

the A.L.C.(C),Hazaribagh,for it, but its failure due to the

adamant attitude of the Managment. The Government had

illegally rejected the reference,but at its challenge by the

Union, the Government as per the Order dt.27.3.2001 of

the Hon’ble Patna High Court, Ranchi Bench, in the CWJC

No.2145/99(R) referred the dispute for an adjudication.

The action of the Management in not paying the wages as

per the NCWA was illegal, discriminatory, anti labour and

vindictive. Thus the demand of the Union for treating the

workmen as regular workmen and for payment of wages as

per the NCWA is legal and justified.

The Union in its rejoinder has specifically denied all

the allegations of the O.P./Management.

3.

Whereas challenging the maintainability of the

reference, the contra pleaded case of the O.P./Management

with categorical denials is that the persons were never

employed by the Management or by any contractor in the

maintenance job of the Railway track or on Plant cleaning

jobs. They never worked in any capacity under the

management .They are jobseekers and the Union has

enrolled their names to provide them employment through

litigation, for which it has made out a false and fabricated

case .There is no Employer-Employee relationship between

the Management and these persons.

The O.P./Management in their rejoinder has

categorically denied all the allegations of the Union/

persons concerned as baseless and false, alleging that

Sri Mithalesh Prasad and 18 others never worked on any

job of permanent and prohibited categories under the

direct control and supervision of the Management, so no

question arises over the alleged completion of 240 days

attendance in each calendar year nor over the alleged

6222

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

camouflage of their working through contractors. So the

demand of the Union is neither legal nor justified.

4.

In this reference, WWI Sanjay Aggrawal, WW2

Suresh Ravidas, (under Sl.No. 6 & 15 as enlisted

respectively) both of the alleged workmen on behalf of

the Union concerned, and MWI Chandra Kant Tiwary,the

Sr.Manager (Estb & Mech.) at Swang Washery for the

O.P./Management have been examined respectively.

Mr. D.Mukherjee,the Learned Advocate as the

Secretary of the Union concerned as per his written

argument as well has to submit that the workmen have

continuously worked in the Railway Track maintenance

and cleaning of the Management from 1990 to 2002 until

their stopping to work. But the evidence of both WWI

Sanjay Aggrawal and WW2 Suresh Ravidas about their

continuous working up to 2002, the year of stopping from

working appears to be inadmissible as unpleaded.

According to Mr. Mukherjee, for non production of the

document called for as per the petition dt.7.11.2003 but

WW2 stated it to be dated 17.11.2003, adverse inference

should be drawn against the Management as held by the

Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of H.D. Singh Vs. Reserve

Bank of India reported in AIR 1986(SC)132. But the petition

dt.7.11.2003 for calling for documents for the period of

1990 till date from Management appears to be a mere

formality, as no relevant documents with the petition rather

with the photocopies of Payment Register from 1995-97

filed. Whereas the production of photocopies of the

alleged payments (Ext.1 series- Photocopies of Payment

Register) for the years 1995-1997 under alleged signature

of Labour Officer V.S.Prasad) in lack of such basic pleading

also appear to be inadmissible as unpleaded, as also for

the reason that none of the documents is evidently duly

authenticated one of any Contractor or of the Management

of the Swang Washery.The evidence of WW2 in para 18

that he did not know any name of the intermediaries

through whom their wages were paid. The evident

admissions of both workmen witnesses (WW1 & 2) that

none of them had got any gate pass or Identity Card for

entry into the Coal Washery nor they have any proof of it

or any pay slip or any paper to show any Authority’s

direction for their work, nor any copy of their

representation to the Union for sponsorship of it, to

establish no employer-employee relationship between

both the parties at any time. The positive evidence of the

MWI Chandrakant Tiwary, the Asstt.Engineer at the

Swang Washery since 1995 is that he did not know of any

worker, as they never kept any workman as a regular worker

for the maintenance of the Railway Track of the

Washery.To him, the Personnel Department keeps the

record of the Contractors Dilip Jaina,Nirvoy Pandey,Anup

Kumar Ravinder Vikash Parsad and Suraj for maintenance

of the Railway Line, but he can not tell their tenure for it.

5.

On the other hand, Mr.D.K.Verma, Learned Counsel

for the O.P./Management contended that admittedly the

workmen are allegedly contractor’s labourer, out of them

none of them has any proof of his working at the said

colliery, so they are not entitled to any regularization or

any relief.

6.

Besides, so far as the alleged attendances of the

workmen for the years 1995 to 1997 as per the photos of

Attendance register (Ext.W.1 series) is concerned, the

workmen have no proof of their continuous working for

240 days during a period of twelve calendar months

preceding the date with the instance reference - the

4th June,1999 - as per the provision under Sec. 25 B (2)(a)(ii)

of the Industrial Dispute Act,1947. The workmen have

utterly failed to discharge the onus of proof at the points

of employer-employee relationship as well as of their

requisite continuous working for the said specified period

at the relevant time. So the plea of Mr. Mukherjee based

on 2011 LLR 1079(SC), Bhilwara Dugh Utpadak Ltd. Vs.

Vinod Kumar at their point is untenable.

7.

In the backdrop of aforesaid findings, none of the

pleas of Mr.Mukherjee, the Learned Advocate cum Union

Representative based on the facts (i) Presumption of the

evidence of the workmen witnesses in lack of any challenge

(AIR 1940(Pat) 683, Karnidan Sarda Vs. Sailaja Kanta Mitra,

1977 Cr. L.J.410, Bal Krishan Vs. State of Delhi and on the

point of successful discharge of the onus of proof as per

the Ext.W.1 series, 2002 LLR449, M/s. Indian Farmer

Fertilizer Co-operative Ltd. vs. Industrial Tribunal No.1,

Allah, and 2008 AIR SCW 3996, G.M., ONGC Shilcher Vs.

ONGC Contractual Workers Union) is applicable to the

instant unproved case.

Under these circumstances, it is, in the terms of the

Reference, hereby awarded that the demand of the Bihar

Colliery Kamgar Union from the Management of the C.C.L.,

Swang Washery for treating Sri Mithalesh Prasad and 18

others workers as per the list as regularized workers of the

Management, and for giving salary and the benefits as

per NCWA is entirely baseless and unjustified.Hence, the

aforesaid alleged workers are not entitled to any relief

from any time.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

Annexure

List of the workmen (Ministry’s Order No. L-20012/199/

99(C-I) dt.8.5.2001)

Sl. No.

Name of the workman

1.

Umesh Kumar Nishad

2.

Tilak Mahato

3.

Rameshwar

4.

Raghunath Saw

5.

Dharmnath Prajapati

6.

Sanjay Agarwal

7.

Narayan Prasad

8.

Bharat Soren

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6223

9.

Dhanether Prasad

10.

Mithalesh Prasad

11.

Dearnand Prasad

12.

Lal Mohan Prasad

13.

Bigon Prajapati

14.

Kiran Prajapati

15.

Suresh Ravidas

16.

Sarro Devi

17.

Bhamani Devi

18.

Surjmani

19.

Nandlal Gope

ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2451-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp]

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

73@2000) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@12@2000&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014

S.O. 2451.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 73/2000)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No

2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/12/2000-IR (C-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2), AT DHANBAD

PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer.

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section

10(1)(d) of the I.D.Act.,1947.

REFERENCE NO 73 OF 2000

PARTIES : Jt. Gen. Secretary,

Janta Sharmik Sangh,

Ena, Islampur, PO:Baghatdih,

Via Jharia, Dhanbad

Vs.

The Gen.Manager,

Kustore Area of M/s BCCL,

PO : Kustore, Dhanbad

Ministry’s Order No L-20012/12/2000(C-I) dt.24.07.2000

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of the workman/Union : None

On behalf of the Management

: None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated, Dhanbad, the 30th July, 2014

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in

exercise of the powers conferred on them under

Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act.,1947 has referred the following

dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order

No. L-20012/12/2000(C-I) dt.24.07.2000.

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the Management of

Borragrah Colliery of Kustore Area of M/s BCCL for

dismissal from service of Kartik Yadav, Ex. M. Loader

based on impersonation is legal and justified in the

eye of Law ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled

to?”

On receipt of the Order No. L-20012/12/2000(C-I) dt.

24.07.2000.of the above mentioned reference from the

Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment,

New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference

Case No. 73-2000 of was registered on 14.08.2000 and

accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue

notices through the Registered Posts to the parties

concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the

date fixed, and to file their written statements along with

the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order,

notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties

concerned.

Both the parties made their appearances and filed

their pleadings and photocopies of their documents. The

Union and the O.P./Management contested the case,

respectively, but none appeared for final argument.

2.

The case of sponsoring Janta Shramik Sangh for

workman Kartik Yadav is that he had been continuously

working as M/L at Borrahgarh Colliery under Kustore Area

of M/s BCCL since his employment in 1973. He was a

regular worker sincerely performing his job for the last

18 years. But the employer charged him for impersonation

as per the Standing Order applicable to the Colliery

employees. The charges were mechanically enforced by

hastily taking the action against him without giving any

proper opportunity .In course of the enquiry being

conducted by the Enquiry Officer, the charge was read

over, but without disclosing any such documents to him.

The Advice or order based on the report of Management

Witness No. 2 unnecessarily related to workman before

the Enquiry Officer. But the Enquiry Officer did not call up

the complainant in the enquiry in that regard. Any

publication in any Local News Paper is baseless to implicate

6224

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

the innocent person, depriving him of livelihood. The

method was also adopted to threaten the workman to

deprive of his opportunity to get jobs. Likewise any report

of the Enquiry Officer based on such unfounded

information is nothing but a simple victimization. The poor

worker is a victim of such improper proposal of action

which is unacceptable in law and facts as well. Besides,

the workman was not provided any paper by the Enquiry

Officer despite his repeated requests, oral and written. So

the workman claimed for his reinstatement in his job with

full back wages for his idle period is justified.

3.

The Union Representative in his rejoinder for the

workman has specifically denied all the allegations of the

O.P./Management, and stated that the discharge of duty

by the Enquiry Officer was not impartial. The Enquiry

Officer had no facts available to declare him guilty. The

Sanction of the Competent Authority was without

application of mind. There was no fraud committed by the

workman, as he was the real Kartik Yadav; he was appointed

in regular manner under practice in vague. The action of

the management towards the workman was due to the

rival union and the management jointly to implicate him in

the managed case to put him out of his employment.

4.

Whereas, catgorically denying the allegations of the

Union/workman, the case of the O.P./Management in

challenge to the maintainability of the reference is that the

workman was working as a Miner/Loader at Borrahgarh

Colliery of M/s BCCL. He was chargesheeted by the

Competent Authority as per the letter dt. 26.12.1990 for

misconduct of impersonating real Kartik Yadav son of Sri

Debu Yadav for getting an employment under clause

26.1.11 and 26.1.12 of the Certified Standing Orders of the

Company. The reply of the workman was found

unsatisfactory, so the Competent Authority was per the

letter dt. 9.7.1993 appointed Sri C.N. Singh, the Personnel

Manager as the Enquiry Officer, to conduct the domestic

enquiry into the matter. The workman fully participated

along with his co-worker in the enquiry. The Enquiry Officer

found the charges fully established against the workman

beyond doubt. So at the sanction of the Competent

Authority, the workman was dismissed from his service as

per the letter dt.10.11.1993.The F.I.R. was lodged with the

Officer-In-Charge, Borrahgarh T.O.P., P.S. Jharia on

7.1.1991.The workman never complained of anything

against the enquiry held by the Enquiry Officer during its

proceeding. The action of the Management for dismissal

of the workman for said fraudulent misconduct is legal

and justified. The Joint General Secretary of the said Sangh

as per letter dt.08.03.1999 raised the Industrial Dispute

before the A.L.C.(C), Dhanbad, after many years. So the

reference is not maintainable.

5.

The O.P./Management in their rejoinder categorically

denying all the allegations of the Union/workman

concerned, has further pleaded that the enquiry was

conducted in accordance with the Principles of Natural

Justice. Any punishment short of dismissal would have

encouraged other to get jobs dubiously in the Company.

The O.P./Management has also sought the permission for

proof the charge, in case the enquiry found unfair at

preliminary issue.

FINDING WITH REASONS

6.

In this reference, at the preliminary issue over the

enquiry, the Tribunal as per the Order No.18 dt. 6.12.2005

had already held the domestic enquiry as fair, proper and

in accordance with the principles of natural justice. Hence,

it came up lately for hearing the final argument of both the

parties on merits.

The case has been all along pending for arguments

on merits. Despite several times notices have been issued

to both the parties, but none appered, so it was finally

reserved for final order.

On perusal of the materials as made available on

behalf of the O.P./Management for final consideration on

merits, I find that the dismissal of alleged workman Kartik

Yadav who had been working as Loader impersonating

actual M/Loder Kartik Yadav S/o Debu Yadav at Burrogarh

Colliery, Bhalgora Area- for his misconducts under clauses

26.1.11 and 26.1.12, i.e. of the Certified Standing Orders of

the Company as per the dismissal letter dt. 9/10.9.1993

(Ext. M.7) was not only quite proper but also just and

proportionate to the grave nature of the said misconducts.

The imposter whose real name was Lali Saw S/o Sarda

Saw of Vill Kusumhara P.S. Visenikalan Distt: Rohtas (Bihar)

must not be free from his criminal liability for his wilful

misconducts of criminal offences concerned.

Hence, it is, in the terms of the reference, hereby

responded and awarded that the action of the Management

of Borrahgarh Colliery, Kustore Area of M/s BCCL in

dismissing the alleged employee Kartik Yadav (Imposter),

Ex.M/Loader from the service on the ground of

impersonation of real employee Kartik Yadav is quite legally

right, proper and justified. The alleged worker is not at all

entitled to any relief.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2452-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

80@2012) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@151@2011&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6225

New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014

S.O. 2452.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 80/2012)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No

2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/151/2011-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD

PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section

10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947.

REFERENCE NO. 80 OF 2012

PARTIES : The Vice President,

Rastriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh,

Rajendra Path, Dhanbad,

Vs.

The General Manager

Kusunda Area of M/s BCCL,

PO : Kusunda, Dhanbad.

Ministry’s Order No. L-20012/151/2011-IR

(CM-I) dt.12.09.2012.

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of the workman/Union : None

On behalf of the Management

: Mr. S. N. Ghosh,

Ld. Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated, Dhanbad, the 07th July, 2014

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in

exercise of the powers conferred on them under

Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947 has referred the following

dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order

No. L-20012/151/2011-IR (CM-I) dt.12.09.2012.

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the Management of Khas

Kusunda Colliery of M/s. BCCL in not paying

monetary compensation to Smt.Chinta Devi,

dependant wife of Late Bindeshwari Singh under

the provisions of NCWA is legal and justified? To

what relief Smt.Chinta Devi, dependant wife of Late

Bindehwari Singh is entitled?”

2.

Neither Union Representative for the Rastriya

Colliery Mazdoor Sangh nor petitioner Smt.Chinta Devi,

dependant wife of Late Bindeshwari Singh appeared nor

any written statement with any document since long

pending has been filed on her behalf. Mr. S.N. Ghosh, the

Ld. Advocate for the O.P./Management Kusunda Area is

present.

Perused the case record, I find that despite three

Regd. Notices dt. 20.12.2012, 08.06.13 and 28.03.2014 have

been issued to the Vice President of the Union concerned

on his address noted in the Reference itself but neither

the Union Representative nor the Petitioner responded to

it. The reference case has been all along pending since

01.10.2013 for filing written statement with documents.

The Union Representative and the petitioner by their

conducts appear to be unwilling or reluctant to proceed

with the case. In such circumstances, no Industrial Dispute

exists as it stands. Since the case is closed and an order of

‘No Industrial Dispute’ existent is passed.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2453-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj bZ-lh-,y- ds

izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa

fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je

U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 17@2011) dks

izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk

FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@42@2010&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2453.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 17/2011)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No

1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. ECL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/42/2010-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. I,

DHANBAD

In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of

I.D. Act, 1947

Ref. No. 17 of 2011

Employer in relation to the management

of Mugma Area, M/s ECI

AND

Their workmen

6226

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances :

For the Employers

: Sri D.K.Verma, Advocate

For the workman

: None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 11/8/2014

AWARD

By Order No. L-20012/42/2010-IR (C-I), dated

14/03/2011, the Central Government in the Ministry of

Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause

(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10

of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following

disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of

Lakhimata Colliery of M/s. ECL in not regularizing

Smt. Sonammuni Modian as CC Maker is fair and

justified? To what relief the concerned workman is

entitled to?”

2.

After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,

Though they took steps for certain dates, subsequently

did not appears nor take any interest in the case. It is

presumed that the disputes between parties have been

resolved in the meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is

passed.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2454-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

34@2010) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@05@2010&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2454.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 34/2010)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No

1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/05/2010-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. I,

DHANBAD

In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D.Act,1947

Ref. No. 34 of 2010 .

Employer in relation to the management of

Kusunda Area, M/s. BCCL

AND

Their workmen

Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances :

For the Employers

: Sri U.N.Lall, Advocate

For the Workman

: Sri M. Prasad, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated 11/8 /2014

AWARD

By Order No.L-20012/05/2010-IR (CM-I), dated

18/05/2010, the Central Government in the Ministry of

Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause

(d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10

of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following

disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of Kusunda

Colliery of M/s. BCCL in not regularizing Sri Krishna

Ram , a Shoval Operator, is legal and justified? What

relief the concerned workman is entitled ?”

2.

After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,

though they took steps for certain dates. But after that the

Sponsoring Union is not taking any interest in the case.

Ld. counsel for the workman is also submits that the

workman is not taking any interest. It is presumed that the

disputes between parties have been resolved in the

meantime. Hence, No Dispute Award is passed.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2455-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj bZ-lh-,y- ds

izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa

fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je

U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 14@2011) dks

izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk

FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@66@2010&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6227

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2455.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 14/2011)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.

1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. ECL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/66/2010-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. I,

DHANBAD

In the matter of reference U/s 10 (1) (d) (2A) of

I.D. Act 1947

Ref. No. 14 of 2011

Employer in relation to the management of

Mugma Area, M/s. ECL

AND

Their workmen

Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances :

For the Employers

: Sri D.K. Verma, Advocate

For the workman

: None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 11/8/2014

AWARD

By Order No. L-20012/66/2010-IR (CM-I), dated

16/03/2011, the Central Government in the Ministry of

Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause

(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10

of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following

disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of Rajapur

OCP of M/s. ECL in not regularizing /converting

S/Shri Nayan Manjhi, Taru Bouri, Meghnath Bouri,

Sri Dipak Bouri and Banshi Bouri from Piece Rate to

Time rate is fair and justified? To what relief the

concerned workmen are entitled to ?”

2.

After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,

Though they took steps for certain dates, subsequently

did not appears nor take any interest in the case. It is

presumed that the disputes between parties have been

resolved in the meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is

passed.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2456-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

253@2000) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@70@2000&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2456.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 253/

2000) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

No. 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/70/2000-IR (C-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

-CUM- LABOUR COURT NO. I, DHANBAD

In the matter of reference U/s 10 (1) (d) (2A) of

I.D. Act, 1947

Ref. No. 253 of 2000

Employer in relation to the management

of Koyla Bhawan, M/s. BCCL

AND

Their workmen

Present : Shri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances :

For the Employers

: Sri D.K.Verma, Advocate

For the workman

: None

For the Impleaded Party : None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated- 12/8/2014

AWARD

By Order No.L-20012/70/2000-IR (C-I), dated.07/09/

2000, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour

has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of

sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following

disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

6228

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of BCCL

Koyla Bhawan in refusing employment to the

dependant son of the deceased workman namly Sri

Ram Swarup Ram is justified? If not, to what relief

the dependant son of the deceased workman is

entitled ?”

2.

After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,

Though they took steps for certain dates, subsequently

did not appears nor take any interest in the case. It is

presumed that the disputes between parties have been

resolved in the meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is

passed.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2457-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

39@2012) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@98@2007&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2457.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 39/2012)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.

1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/98/2007-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. I,

DHANBAD

In the matter of reference U/s 10 (1) (d) (2A) of

I.D. Act, 1947

Ref. No. 39 of 2012

Employer in relation to the management of

Sijua Area, M/s. BCCL

AND

Their workmen

Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances :

For the Employers

: Sri D.K. Verma, Advocate

For the workman

: None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated-20/8/2014

AWARD

By Order No.L-20012/98/2007-IR (CM-I), dated

17/08/2007, the Central Government in the Ministry of

Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause

(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10

of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following

disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of Sendra

Bansjora Colliery of M/s. BCCL in denying

regularization as cap Lamp Assistant to Shri Arun

Rawani General mazdoor (U.G) is justified and legal?

If not, to what relief is the concerned workman

entitled and from which date ?”

2.

After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,

Though they took steps for certain dates, subsequently

did not appears nor take any interest in the case. It is

presumed that the disputes between parties have been

resolved in the meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is

passed.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2458-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

21@2009) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@95@2008&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2458.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 21/2009)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.

1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/95/2008-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6229

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT NO. I,

DHANBAD

In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D.Act.1947

Ref. No. 21 of 2009

Employer in relation to the management of

Nichitpur Colliery M/s. BCCL,

AND

Their workmen.

Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances :

For the Employers

: Sri D.K. Verma, Advocate

For the workman

: Sri U.N. Lall , Advocate .

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal.

Dated 21/8 /2014

AWARD

By Order No.L-20012/95/2008-IR (CM-I), dated

16/02/2009, the Central Government in the Ministry of

Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause

(d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10

of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following

disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“(i) Whether the action of the management of

Nichitpur Colliery of M/s. BCCL in Superannuating

Smt. Noulash Devi W/Loader w.e.f. 30.06.2005 is

justified and legal?(ii) To What relief is the workman

concerned entitled ?”

2.

After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,

Though they took steps for certain dates, But after that

the Sponsoring Union is not taking any interest in the

case. Id counsel for the workman is also submits that the

workman is not taking any interest. It is presumed that the

disputes between parties have been resolved in the

meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is passed.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2459-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

60@2003) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@269@2002&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º

,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2459.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 60/2003)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No

1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their

workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.

[No. L-20012/269/2002-IR (C-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD.

In the matter of reference U/s 10 (1) (d) (2A) of

I.D.Act. 1947

Ref. No. 60 of 2003

Employer in relation to the management of

Sijua Area M/s. BCCL

AND

Their workmen

Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer.

Appearances :

For the Employers

: Sri D.K. Verma, Advocate

For the workman

: Sri B.B. Pandey, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated 20/8/ 2014

AWARD

By Order No.L-20012/269/2002-IR (C-I), dated.08/

07/2003, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour

has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of

sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following

disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the demand of RCMS from the

management of BCCL, Sijua Area to consider the

V.R.S. application of Smt. Shanti Pasin and to provide

employment to her son, Sri vivekanand is proper

6230

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

and justified? If so, to what relief is the concerned

workman and her dependent entitled? ’’

2.

This Case is received from the Ministry of Labour &

Employment on 22.07.2003. After receipt of reference ,

both parties are noticed. The Sponsoring Union files their

written statement on 13.05.2010. The management files their

written statement on 22.07.2010. One witness has been

examined on behalf of the management. No witness has

been examined on behalf of the workman but they only

marked document as Ext. W-1 to W-4.

3.

The short point to be decided in this reference is as

per female V.R.S. Scheme. One lady workman applied for

V.R.S. and their male child applied for job in the place of

the lady workman.

4.

The BCCL management did not act on the

application of woman workman as a result of which , the

lady workman retired, and virtually application for job of

her dependent workman refused.

5.

When the dispute arose it is argued by the

management that there is no provision to give employment

to his /her dependent of retired employee under V.R.S.

Scheme. But it is submitted by the female workman that as

there case was not considered, his children are out of

employment since more than 10 years and above.

6.

It is also submitted by the workman, that they applied

according to scheme below the age of 55, and their claim

should have been decided promptly.

7.

As per Ext. W-1 the workman filed the petition on

05.10.2000, and in this regard the management also send

the reply on 18.11.2000 directing the applicant to file certain

documents as per list. But the workman or her dependent

did not comply the same.

8.

From the document Ext. W-2 it appears that the

workman was asked to submit application in proper format

alongwith documents enclosed. But the same was not

complied by the workman . Hence the management is not

obliged to provide job to the dependent of the female

workman, since she retired after attending her sixtieth

years of service. Therefore the claim of the workman is

refused.

9.

Considering the facts and circumstance of the case,

I hold that the demand of RCMS from the management of

BCCL, Sijua Area to consider the V.R.S. application of Smt.

Shanti Pasin and to provide employment to her son, Sri

vivekanand is not proper and justified. Hence he not

entitled to get any relief.

This is my award.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2460-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj nf{k.k iwoZ jsysos

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k] tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 46@06) dks izdkf'kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&41012@25@1992&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2460.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 46/06)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,

Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute

between the management of South Eastern Railway and

their workmen, received by the Central Government on

08/09/2014.

[No. L-41012/25/1992-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/46/06

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R.B. PATLE

Shri Avadhram,

S/o Shri Ramprit, G-Cabin,

Bhilai Charoda BMY,

Bhilai, Distt. Durg

.....Workman

Versus

Divisional Railway Manager,

S.E. Railway,

Bilaspur.

General Manager,

S.E. Railway ,

Garden Reach, Kolkata

.....Management

AWARD

Passed on this 30th day of July 2014

1.

As per letter dated 29-8-2006 by the Government of

India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is

received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under

Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-41012/

25/1992-IR(B-I). The dispute under reference relates to:

“Whether the action of the management of South

Eastern Railway in terminating the services of Shri

Avadhram orally w.e.f. 13-5-90 is legal and justified?

If not, to what relief he is entitled to?”

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6231

2.

After receiving reference, notices were issued to

the parties. Workman submitted statement of claim at Page

4/1 to 4/6. Case of workman is that he was employed as

Gangman on temporary status vide appointment order

dated 2-3-90. After issue of said appointment order, he

was engaged as Gangman and continued to work as such

in Bilaspur Division of S.E.Railway. That it is surprised

without giving order in writing, his services were orally

terminated w.e.f. 30-5-90. Prior to his termination, no notice

or order was issued to workman. That alongwith him about

150 persons were promoted by Railway Administration.

All these persons represented the matter to Railway

Administration vide letter dated 3-12-90 through their

representative Shri Dilip Kumar. Ist party workman and

many other persons were terminated by various orders

because the workmen had adopted employment in Railway

by producing false documents. It is reiterated that

workman was appointed and joined duty on 2-3-90. He

completed 120 days service. He attained temporary status

provided under Indian Railway Establishment Manual.

The casual labour who attained temporary status is entitled

to rights and privileges under Sl.No. 2511 of Railway

Establishment Manual. Said provision contemplates that

all the provisions of the disciplinary and Appeal Rules are

applicable to such an employee. The services of workman

were terminated on charges of securing employment by

producing false documents. Workman can not be

terminated without following procedure. He further

submits that termination of his service is for alleged

misconduct. Therefore it was necessary to conduct

enquiry. Issuing showcause notice was mandatory.

Termination was not without following principles of natural

justice. The termination is violative of mandatory

provisions and deserves to be quashed and set-aside. Ist

party workman further submits that he is covered as

workman under I.D.Act. The termination without

conducting enquiry, without giving him opportunity

amounts to retrenchment under I.D.Act. Said retrenchment

was without giving any retrenchment compensation and

therefore void. The termination is arbitrary, illegal and liable

to be quashed. Workman further submits that order of

removal from service, denying opportunity for defence is

violative of Article 311 of the constitution. The termination

without giving opportunity of hearing is illegal. The

termination of service without opportunity of hearing is

nullity. The workman reiterates all those contentions and

submits that he may be allowed reinstatement with back

wages.

3.

IInd party filed Written Statement at page 7/1 to 7/3.

All material contentions of workman are denied. IInd party

denies that workman was engaged as gangman on daily

rated casual basis. It is submitted that there was a

condition stipulated in engagement letter dated 14-2-90

that if the working certificate/caste certificate/ service

certificate is found false, at any time during engagement,

the workman be terminated without any notice. Therefore

workman along with other casual gangman whose

certificate was found false were terminated. It is denied

that workman completed 120 days and he obtained

temporary status. It is submitted that in view of condition

mentioned in engagement letter, no notice was required to

be issued to the workman for termination of his service.

Since the act of workman securing Government service as

casual Gangman producing false certificate. Since

termination from service is not arbitrary, IInd party submits

that workman should prove that the service certificate is

bonafide. On all such contentions, IInd party prays for

rejection of claim.

4.

Workman filed rejoinder at Page 8/1 to 8/2 reiterating

its contentions in Statement of claim.

5.

Considering pleadings on record, the points which

arise for my consideration and determination are as under.

My findings are recorded against each of them for the

reasons as below:-

(i)

Whether the action of the manage-

In Negative

ment of South Eastern Railway in

terminating the services of Shri

Avadhram orally w.e.f. 13-5-90 is

legal and justified?

(ii) If not, what relief the workman

As per final

is entitled to?”

order.

REASONS

6.

The workman submits that he had completed 120

days service as casual labour as per Establishment Manual

2511, he has attended temporary status. The establishment

manual 2511 contemplate that all provisions of Disciplinary

and Appeal Rules are applicable to such employees. The

services of workman were terminated without holding any

kind of enquiry is legal. Though time was given to learned

counsel for Ist party to produce Railway Establishment

Manual 2511, it is not produced for perusal. The pleadings

in statement of claim of workman show that he was

appointed vide order dated 2-3-90 and terminated on 30-5-

90. Thus he hardly worked for 2 months 11 days and not

120 days claimed by workman in his affidavit of evidence.

Evidence of workman in para-5 on above point is

inconsistent with pleadings and cannot be relied.

7.

Workman filed affidavit of his evidence. His affidavit

is devoted about raising dispute after filing Writ Petition

No. 1573/97 which was transferred to Chattisgarh High

Court. Workman has stated that he was employed as

gangman on temporary status as per order dated 2-3-90.

He continued to work as such in Bilaspur Division. In

Para-8 workman submits that there was no need to submit

casual card or any other certificate for getting employment

as casual labour. Therefore he could not be terminated on

said ground. That termination of his service is without

6232

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

giving opportunity of hearing is illegal. In his cross-

examination workman says after two months working in

May 1990, he was stopped from working in the department.

He knows that department had given letter if any irregularity

was found in appointment, the appointment shall stand

cancelled. The Writ petition was filed in High Court by

Baburao. He was not party. He claims that temporary status

was granted to him for the days he was working. He denies

that document produced by him was bogus and therefore

his services were terminated. From evidence of workman,

it is clear that he was appointed as casual gangman on

2-3-90. His services were terminated from 13-5-90. Workman

hardly worked for 2 months 11 days.

8.

The evidence of management’s witness Shri

R.Shankaran is on the point that workman was appointed

in Railway as per notification in 1990 as casual gangman.

The condition was stipulated by management in

notification that if at any time it is found that the certificate

are false during their engagement the service will be

terminated automatically without notice. The department

had carried out mass verification of certificates submitted

by candidates and on detailed investigation after

scrutinizing of records it was found that there were about

150 candidates found false appointees based on fake

certificates. Management’s witness further said that the

administration decided to take stern action with heavy

hand not leaving those who are found guilty. However

the relevant files and documents were stolen from the office

of the Investigating officer Shri Bhasker Rao by breaking

the lock and almirah. Management’s witness in his cross-

examination says in 1990, he was posted in Garden Reach

in Calcutta, S.E.Rly. He was giving evidence as per record,

gone through available record. He has seen notification

by which workman was appointed. The notification of

workman was on casual basis. Advertisement of the post

was of casual basis. The advertisement continued clause

that past experience if available would be considered.

Casual workers are issued certificate of their experience of

working in Railway. He claimed ignorance whether any

register is maintained for issuing such certificate. The

witness said Committee was nominated for verifying

genuine of experience certificate. Said Committee was

headed by Bhaskar Rao, APO, Bilaspur. He has not seen

document about constitution of said committee. The office

of Bhaskar Rao was not provided with security. There

was Security Guard at entrance of the gate. The witness

was unable to tell whether the room of the office of Bhaskar

Rao was locked on the day of alleged incident. He admits

that about 140 persons including workmen were terminated

from service as per record. In para-6 of the affidavit it is

stated that documents were taken away breaking lock of

Almirah. He claims ignorance whether report of Committee

was sent to the workman. He also claims ignorance whether

genuine certificate of expenses remained with railway

office.

9.

Document Exhibit M-1 shows list of casual gangman

appointed vide office order dated 14-2-90, 22-2-90 should

be discharged with immediate effect as the certificate

produced have been found false. The letter speaks that

those candidates should not be reengaged. The date of

discharge should be intimated to the office. Their names

are recorded in blank list register. No AEN/PWI should

issue service certificates in favour of these candidates.

Workman in his evidence says that production of

experience certificate was not necessary for appointment

as casual gangman whereas management’s witness says

that experience certificate was necessary. Workman has

not produced appointment order issued by Railway

authorities to him. The evidence of workman is not

corroborated by document. On the other hand,

management has produced document Exhibit M-1. The

details of the documents discussed above clearly shows

that the experience certificate produced by large number

of candidates were found fake on scrutiny. The incident

was also reported to police, FIR was lodged. FIR is not

proved. Management’s witness has stated the material

documents were stolen breaking office of Bhaskar Rao,

Inspecting Officer. Management’s witness is cross-

examined in detail. However there is no suggestion of the

management’s witness that because of theft breaking lock

was not submitted. The evidence is tested on probability.

The evidence of management’s witness is corroborated

by document Exhibit M-1. That large number of candidates

had submitted experience certificate and such certificates

were found fake. The evidence about scrutiny of those

documents is not produced on record. Mr. Bhaskar Rao is

not examined.

10.

Learned counsel for workman submitted written

notes of argument and copies of award passed in R/74/09,

53/91 & 139/93 pointing out the view taken by this Tribunal

in different cases. Award are not binding but consistency

needs to be adopted. In R/74/05, relief to workman Ku.

Vidyavwati, the legality of resignation letter was in

question. Management had failed to prove that resignation

submitted by said workman was legal. From reading of

Para-11 of the award it can be seen that only evidence

shows that workman was not given any time for

reconciliation. She signed on the documents believing that

it pertains regularization of her absence and payment of

salary. Therefore alleged resignation accepted by

management was found not legal. In R/153/91, dispute

related to those documents passing 10th standard, HSc

Examination by workman. From reading of Para-9 of the

award, it can be seen that Principal of Govt. School,

Chhappa has reported that workman was not student of

said school, the documents were bogus. IInd party

produced those documents at Page 12/4, 12/5.

Management’s witness stated that those documents 12/5

were produced by workman alongwith biodata form. There

was no reason for management of IInd party verify

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6233

genuiness from Principal Govt. School, Chhappa. The facts

of the present case are not comparable. Workman has not

produced appointment letter issued to him. To substantiate

his contention that submitting experience certificate was

not necessary for appointment as casual gangman. If

document Exhibit M-1 is considered, it appears that

submission of service card was necessary for appointment

as casual employee. In award in R/139/93, workman had

pleaded that he attained temporary status after completion

of 120 days service. That termination of his service was in

violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. In present case,

workman is not alleging violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act.

Despite of pleadings that he acquired temporary status

on completion of 120 days working as per Railway

Establishment Manual 2511, the rule is not produced. On

perusal, pleading of workman itself shows that he was

appointed on 3-2-90 and orally terminated on 13-5-90. He

worked for 2 months 11 days. Therefore question of

violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act doesnot arise.

11.

Learned counsel for workman Shri A.K.Shashi

heavily emphasized that services were terminated on

ground that service certificate submitted by workman was

found fake. No enquiry was conducted. The termination

of his service is stigma on workman. Therefore termination

of service of workman is illegal. In support of his argument,

learned counsel relies on ratio held in :

Case of Indu Bhushan Dwivedi and State of

Jharkhand reported in 2010-SCLJ-416. Above cited

case related to appellant joined service as Munsif in

1982, he was promoted as Sub Divisional Judicial

Magistrate in 1996. While he was posted as Sub

Divisional Judicial Magistrate at Chaibasa, a news

item appeared in Dainik Jagran dated 2-7-03

suggesting that the appellant had misbehaved and

manhandled an accused, named, Anup Kumar ad

constable Sheo Pujan Baitha. On the next day i.e. on

3-7-03, the appellant made a representation to

District and Sessions Judge, West Singhbhum at

Chaibasa with the request that an inquiry be got

conducted into the matter. From reading of para-8 of

the judgment it is clear that Enquiry Officer

formulated total 5 points for the same of his

convenience.

The facts of the present case are not comparable

therefore ratio cannot be applied to case at hand.

12.

There is serious dispute between parties whether

for appointment of casual gangman, submission of

experience certificate was necessary, whether it was a

condition for re-appointment. If such certificate is found

false, fake, bogus, the services of casual gangman so

appointed could be automatically terminated. Workman

though appointed on 3-2-90, he has not produced the

appointment letter. He has not explained reasons for non-

production of the appointment letter. On the other hand,

the evidence of management’s witness shows that Bhaskar

Rao was inspecting gangman for experience certificate and

theft of record was committed by breaking lock. The

evidence of witness on above point is not shattered in

cross-examination. Therefore I find no reason to discuss

evidence of management’s witness when record is lost, it

was the record about verification of experience certificate

was lost because of theft. There was condition in

appointment order if experience certificate submitted by

candidate found false, their services would be terminated

automatically without notice it forms the part of service

conditions. Management of IInd party has terminated

services as per conditions in the appointment order. As

workman had worked only for 2 months 11 days, he has

not acquired temporary status, it was not necessary to

hold DE against workman. On the point, learned counsel

for Ist party relies on ratio held in :

Reliance is also placed in case of Bhagwan Singh

Rawat versus State of MP reported in 2003(4)

M.P.J.T.309. the facts of present case are not

comparable as in above cited case allegation against

petitioners was of making demand of illegal

gratification- removal from the post. Their Lordship

held until and unless petitioner is found guilty of

demanding illegal gratification and charge is

established, the petitioner could not be fastened

with penalty of removal without making any enquiry

into charge of demand of illegal gratification.

Case of Nepal singh versus State of UP reported in

AIR -1980-SC-1459. Their Lordship held the order

terminating the services of temporary Govt. servant

and exfacie innocuous in that it doesnot cast any

stigma on the Govt. servant or visits him with penal

consequences must be regarded as effecting a

termination simpliciter but if it is discovered on the

basis of material adduced that although innocent in

its terms the order was passed in fact with a view to

punishing the Government servant, it is a punitive

order which can be passed only after complying

with Article 311(2).

Considering the ratio in above cited case and order

Exhibit M-1, the IInd party had directed candidates

should not be re-engaged in circumstances that their

names are recorded in the blank list register. Further

FIR with police will be lodged under Section 420 of

IPC for cheating and forgery document the candidate

and Sr. Subordinates who had issued false

certificates. His Lordship considering the petitioner

were appointed initially on daily wage basis by order

dated 3-6-03 in compliance of his orders, he joined

said post. Order of regularizing employees cancelled

on 10-6-03. Their Lordship held the right accrued to

petitioner when the order was passed on 3-6-03.

6234

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

The ratio cannot be applied to the case at hand as

the facts are not comparable. Workman has not produced

appointment letter.

13.

Considering the ratio held in AIR-1980 -SC-1459 as

workman was not given opportunity of hearing before

discharge of his service, the discharge order/ termination

is in violation of Article 311 of the constitution and therefore

cannot be upheld. For above reasons, I record my finding

in Point No.1 in Affirmative.

14.

Point No.2- in view of my finding in Point No.1 that

termination of workman is not legal, question arises to

what relief the workman is entitled? Whether the workman

is entitled for reinstatement with back wages. Workman

was appointed as casual gangman. He worked for 2 ½

months. His experience certificate was found fake as such

his services were terminated. Workman in his evidence on

affidavit has not disclosed what work he is doing since

termination of his service. Management’s witness also not

stated whether workman is in gainful employment.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case,

reinstatement of workman with 25 % back wages would

be appropriate. Accordingly I record my finding in Point

No.2.

15.

In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1)

The action of the management of South Eastern

Railway in terminating the services of Shri Avadhram

orally w.e.f. 13-5-90 is not legal and proper.

(2)

IInd party is directed to reinstate workman as casual

gangman with continuity of service and 25 % back

wages.

Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman

within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In

case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum

from the date of award till its realization.

16.

Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government

of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2461-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj èku y{eh cSad

fy- ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k] v#ukdqye ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 26@2010) dks

izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk

FkkA

¹la- ,y&12012@05@2010&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2461.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 26/2010)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,

Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial

dispute between the management of Dhanalakshim Bank

Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central

Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-12012/05/2010-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

ERNAKULAM

Present

: Shri.D.Sreevallabhan, B.Sc., LL.B, Presiding

Officer

(Wednesday the 30th day of July, 2014/8th Shravana 1936)

ID No. 26/2010

Workman

: Shri Karnal Ranganath

S/o Shri Thevamadathil Anandaraya Iyer

Rappal Desam, Parappukkara Village

Mukundapuram Taluk

Trichur

Kerala State

By Adv. Shri V J James

Management : The Assistant General Manager(HR)

Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd.

P B No.9, Dhanalakshrni Building

Naickanal

Thrissur (Kerala) - 680001

By M/s.B S Krishnan Associates

This case coming up for final hearing on 24.07.2014

and this Tribunal-cum-Labour Court on 30.07.2014 passed

the following:

AWARD

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of

sub-section(l) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Government

of India/Ministry of Labour as per Order No-L-12012/05/

2010-IR(B-I) dated 12.08.2010 referred the industrial dis-

pute to this tribunal for adjudication.

2.

The dispute is:

“Whether the action of the management of

Dhanalakshrni Bank Ltd., Thrissur, in dismissing the

services of Shri Kamal Ranganath, Clerk, is legal

and justified? If not, what relief the concerned

workman is entitled to?”

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6235

3.

After appearance of the parties and submission of

pleadings the case was posted for evidence. Evidence was

adduced from both sides. Afterwards it was submitted by

the learned counsel for both sides that there is chance for

settlement and hence the case is to be posted in the Lok

Adalath. It was taken up in the Lok Adalath as agreed to by

both parties. The matter was settled between the parties

by entering into a full and final settlement. They have jointly

filed compromise incorporating the terms of the settlement.

Hence an award can be passed in terms of the compromise.

4.

In the result an award is passed in terms of the

compromise which will form the part of the award. The

award will come into force one month after its publication

in the Official Gazette.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and

typed by her, corrected and passed by me on this the 30th

day of July, 2014.

D. SREEVALLABHAN, Presiding Officer

APPENDIX - NIL

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM

ID No. 26/2010

Shri Kamal Ranganath

.....Workman

Vs

Dhanalaxmi Bank Ltd.

.....Management

The matter was taken up in Lok Adalat and the parties

agreed to settle the dispute on the following terms:—

1.

The management agrees to appoint the workman in

service as a fresh clerk. The workman will not be

eligible for any back wages or any benefits, what so

ever, including gratuity, for his past service with the

bank.

2.

The workman agrees to the above conditions and

undertakes that he will not make any claim, under

any circumstances, what so ever, for the back wages,

or any benefits for his past service with the bank.

3.

The management agrees to issue the order of

appointment to the workman, as above, within 30

days from the date of receipt of the copy of the

settlement.

Both the parties agree to the above terms and

conditions and agree to pass an award in terms of this

compromise.

Dated this the 24th day of July, 2014.

Workman : -Sd/-

Management : -Sd/-

Counsel for

Counsel for

Workman: -Sd/-

Management : -Sd/-

-Sd/-

Mediator

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2462-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj LVsV cSad vkWiQ

ifV;kyk ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds

chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k] p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 20@2011) dks izdkf'kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&12011@44@2011&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2462.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 20/2011)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

No. 1, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the

industrial dispute between the management of State Bank

of Patiala and their workmen, received by the Central

Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-12011/44/2011-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,

PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,

CHANDIGARH

Case No. ID 20 of 2011

Reference No. L-12011/44/2011-IR(B-I) dated 25.10.2011

Shri Jarnail Singh

Son of Shri Lekh Ram,

resident of Vill. Chajjumajra,

Post Office Landran,

Teh. Kharar, Punjab

C/o The President,

SC/ST Employees Welfare Association,

Chandigarh Circle (C) House No. 3086/2,

Sector-44-D, Chandigarh.

....Workman

Versus

1.

The Chief Manager,

State Bank of Patiala,

PPFG Department,

Head Office, The Mall,

Patiala (Punjab).

...Respondent

Appearances :

For the Workman

:

None.

For the Management

:

Sh. N. K. Zakhmi

6236

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

AWARD

Passed on:-4.8.2014

Government of India Ministry of Labour vide

notification No. L-12011/44/2011-IR(B-I) dated 25.10.2011

has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for

adjudication:

Term of Reference:

“Whether the action of the management of State

Bank of Patiala, Patiala in not considering Shri Jarnail

Singh, Peon as member of Pension Fund Scheme

despite showing him as pension fund optee in his

salary slips and not paying him contributory PF till

2009, is legal and justified? To what relief the

workman is entitled?”

2.

Case called repeatedly. None appeared on behalf of

the workman despite appearance on behalf of the workman

in the past. None is present to pursue the case of the

workman. For Management Sh. N.K. Zakhmi is present. It

appears that the workman is not interested to pursue with

the present reference. The same is returned to the Central

Govt. for want of prosecution. Central Govt. be informed.

Soft as well as hard copy be sent to the Central Govt. for

publication.

S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer

Chandigarh

04.08.2014

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2463-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj nf{k.k ekykckj

xzkeh.k cSad ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds

chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k v:ukoqQye ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 11@2010) dks

izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk

FkkA

¹la- ,y&12012@48@2009&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2463.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 11/2010)

of the Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure, in the

industrial dispute between the management of South

Malabar Gramin Bank and their workmen, received by the

Central Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-12012/48/2009-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

ERNAKULAM

Present : Shri D. SREEVALLABHAN, B.Sc., LL.B,

Presiding Officer

(Tuesday the 22nd day of July, 2014/31st Ashadha, 1936)

ID No. 11/2010

Workman

: Shri K Vijayan

S/o Shri K Kannan Krishna,

O.O., 14/653 D, Pantheerankavu P O,

Kozhikode - 19

By M/s. M. R. Singh & Company

Management : The Chairman,

South Malabar Gramin Bank,

Head Office, Post Box No.10,

Malappuram

By Advs. Shri T. R. Ravi & Shri Ashok

B. Shenoy

This case coming up for final hearing on 30.06.2014

and this Tribunal-cum-Labour Court on 22.07.2014 passed

the following:

AWARD

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of

sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of

the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the

Government of India/Ministry of Labour vide its Order

No. L-12012/48/2009-IR(B-I) dated 07.01.2010 has referred

the industrial dispute scheduled therein for adjudication

to this tribunal.

2.

The dispute is:

‘Whether the action of the management of South

Malabar Gramin Bank in imposing the penalty of

dismissal from the services w.e.f. 04.04.1996 on Shri

Vijayan K is justified? If not, what relief he is entitled

to and from which date?’

3.

The workman had joined as Clerk in the service of

the management bank in the year 1990. He was confirmed

in service on 11.02.1991. While he was working in the

Kalpatta branch of the management bank he was dismissed

from service on 04.04.1996 for habitual absenteeism by

invoking the power under Regulation 30(2) of the South

Malabar Gramin Bank Staff Service Regulations, 1980.

Challenge is made as to the legality and justifiability of the

order of dismissal by raising this industrial dispute.

4.

The allegations in the claim statement put in by the

workman after his appearance in this case, in a nutshell,

are that he was effectively and promptly discharging his

duties after joining the service of the bank in the year 1990

as Clerk-cum-Cashier and his work was very much

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6237

appreciated on many occasions through letters and by

issuing certificates. Unfortunately he was bed ridden due

to rheumatic arthritis while working in the Kalpatta branch

and had to undergo prolonged continuous treatment for a

long time. Hence he was unable to attend his official duties

and for each and every absence he had submitted

application for leave. On 31.01.1995 the Chairman of the

South Malabar Gramin Bank, Malappuram issued a show

cause notice to him and to which a detailed explanation

dated 03.08.1995 was submitted by him through proper

channel. Later the Chairman published a notice in

Mathrubhumi daily dated 04.04.1996 about his termination

from service. The termination notice was issued without

conducting any domestic enquiry and without affording

opportunity to the workman to defend in utter violation of

the principles of natural justice. Workman submitted a

representation dated 10.04.1996 to the Chairman and

without considering it a letter dated 23.04.1996 was issued

advising him to file an appeal to the Board of Directors of

the management bank. Thereby he had filed an appeal

before the Board of Directors of the bank but it was

dismissed. Against the order of dismissal the workman

filed OP No.7246/2002 before the Hon’ble High Court of

Kerala. It was closed without prejudice to the right of the

workman to seek legal redress if any. He has not been

gainfully employed since the date of termination and still

remains unemployed. He belongs to Schedule Caste and

is a member of Valluva community. His family consists of

his aged parents suffering from geriatric ailments, his wife

and child and an unemployed unmarried sister. All of them

are depending on him for their livelihood. His termination

from service is illegal and it is only a calculated and pre-

planned attempt of the management to drive him out of

service for wreaking vengeance. Hence it is prayed to set

aside the termination order and direct the management

bank to reinstate him in service with full back wages and

all service benefits.

5.

Management filed written statement challenging the

maintainability of the order of reference on the ground

that the claim of the workman became stale as there was

inordinate delay in raising the industrial dispute. It is

contended that he was dismissed from service w.e.f.

04.04.1996 due to his continuous unauthorized absence

without prior permission and leave application. After

joining service in the year 1990 as probationary junior

clerk and confirmation on 11.02.1991 he was working in

the Kalpatta Branch of the management bank from

02.01.1992 onwards. While so he was in the habit of

unauthorizedly absenting himself from duties and during

the period from 17.10.1993 to 23.07.1994 he had absented

from duty unauthorizedly on ten occasions. His absence

for 162 days during that period was treated as absence

without leave on loss of pay by order dated 01.08.1994.

From 07.07.1994 to 06.06.1995 he was continuously absent

from duties for 335 days and it was also treated as absence

without leave on loss of pay after sending several letters

for his non-adherence to leave rules. After the continuous

spell of unauthorized absence for 335 days he was again

on unauthorized absence without leave and on loss of

pay on 14.06.1995, from 21.06.1995 to 25.07.1995,

11.08.1995, 24.08.1995, 11.09.1995, 16.09.1995, 10.11.1995,

14.11.1995, 16.11.1995, 20.11.1995, 23.12.1995, 27.12.1995,

02.01.1996 to 06.01.1996, 11.01.1996, 20.01.1996, 24.01.1996

and 29.01.1996. Thus during the 27 months from 17.10.1993

to 29.01.1996 he was unauthorizedly absent without leave

and on loss of pay for a total of 535 days. On 28.02.1994 it

was noted in his service records that he had disobeyed

orders and directions of the superiors, violated the bank’s

standing instructions and issued cheques without having

sufficient funds in his account in the branch ignoring the

instructions of the manager. On that day a chargesheet

was issued to him with regard to the issuance of thirteen

cheques on different dates without keeping enough funds

in his account. All the cheques were returned unpaid and

the manager of Kalpatta branch had instructed him on

10.08.1993 to surrender all the unused cheque leaves with

him. Ignoring the instruction he had issued five more

cheques after the receipt of the letter intimating the

instruction. On 23.08.1994 he was issued with a

chargesheet for unauthorized absence and for issuance

of cheques without sufficient funds. In the letter dated

28.01.1995 addressed to the Manager, Industrial Relations

Cell by the Manager, Personal Administration of the

management bank for transferring the files relating to his

unauthorized absence it was stated that the workman was

asked by the Branch Manager in writing to appear before

Dr. T. Bharghava, Govt. Civil Surgeon for medical check-

up through his letter dated 15.12.1994 but it was returned

as unclaimed. It was also stated therein that all the letters

sent from the branch in the address given by him were

returned as unclaimed. On 31.01.1995 the Chairman of the

management bank issued a show cause notice to him

detailing the unauthorized absence and stating that it had

become impracticable to communicate with him. Since he

was habitually absent affecting the discipline he was asked

to show cause why he should not be dismissed as per

Regulations 30(1) and 30(2) of the Staff Regulations

governing him. The show cause notice sent through

registered post was returned unclaimed. It could be served

in person only on 26.07.1995 when he came to join duty.

While so his request for leave from 01.04.1995 to 30.04.1995

sent through registered post was rejected by the bank on

22.04.1995. He had submitted his explanation to the show

cause notice on 07.08.1995 stating that he was bed ridden

due to rheumatic fever from 17.10.1993 onwards and making

request to take a lenient view. He also made request to

pardon him for not informing the change of address during

6238

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

his leave period. While so the enquiry with respect to the

chargesheet issued to him on 28.02.1994 was completed

and a report was submitted with the finding that the

charges are proved. On 10.02.1996 the disciplinary

authority issued show cause notice proposing the

stoppage of two increments as penalty for the proved

charges. He had absconded from 01.02.1996 violating the

undertaking in the explanation to the show cause notice

that he will not be on unauthorized absence any more.

Hence the management decided to dismiss him from

service. Since there was no effective method available to

serve the order a notice was published in the Mathrubhumi

daily on 04.04.1996 about the dismissal. On 10.04.1996 he

gave a representation with the prayer that he might not be

dismissed and with a request to give him a transfer to

Kozhikode stating that the climate at Wyanad was affecting

his health. On 23.04.1996 he was informed that he can

prefer an appeal if he was aggrieved by the order of

dismissal. The order of dismissal was served on him by

registered post on 18.04.1996. As per the Regulations the

appeal was to be filed within one month from the date of

the order but he did not prefer any appeal within that

period. While so the management received a letter dated

10.06.1996 from the Thamarassery branch of the Canara

Bank, which is the sponsor bank of the management bank,

informing that the workman along with his father had

availed three gold loans during July and August, 1994

pledging spurious gold ornaments and it was detected on

11.01.1996. On 22.01.1996 the Thamarassery branch of the

Canara Bank filed a complaint before the police against

him and his father. After preliminary enquiries the spurious

gold pledged were taken into custody by the police. It

may be the reason for the sudden absconding of the

workman from 01.02.1996. Three years after his dismissal

he preferred an appeal on 06.04.1999 before the Board of

Directors of the management with the prayer to set aside

the order of dismissal. The appeal was dismissed on

19.05.1999. Thereafter in February, 2002 he filed Original

Petition No.7246/2002(K) before the Hon’ble High Court

of Kerala challenging the order of dismissal. The OP was

closed on 13.07.2005 allowing the workman to raise an

industrial dispute. This industrial dispute was raised after

more than 2½ years after the closure of the OP. The

industrial dispute was raised with regard to the dismissal

of service effected 12 years back and it has become stale.

The dismissal of the workman from service on 04.04.1996

is legal, valid and bonafide. The complaint of the workman

that the dismissal of his service was effected without

conducting a domestic enquiry, without allowing him to

defend his position and in violation of the principles of

natural justice is untenable and unsustainable. Dismissal

was effected duly in terms of Regulation 30(2) of the South

Malabar Gramin Bank Staff Service Regulations, 1980

having due regard to the fact that it was impracticable to

communicate with the workman since he was absconding.

It is in no way illegal and if for any reason it would be

found by this Tribunal that the dismissal was not proper

or legal for want of an enquiry the management has to be

afforded an opportunity to adduce evidence. The

allegations as to illness, submission of leave applications

and non-employment are all false. Workman has been

gainfully employed ever since the dismissal from service.

There is no vengeance for the management towards him.

The management has lost confidence in him due to his

conduct which is unbecoming of an employee of a banking

institution. The antecedents of the workman, the position

he held in the bank etc. justifies the dismissal and he does

not deserve any leniency. Hence he is not entitled to any

relief.

6.

Workman filed rejoinder denying the contentions in

the written statement and reaffirming the allegations in

the claim statement.

7.

Evidence, both oral and documentary, was adduced

from both sides for the purpose of deciding this reference.

For the workman he was examined as WW1 and Exts.W1

to W32 were got marked. The documents produced by

the management pursuant to the direction given by this

Tribunal on the application of the workman were marked

as Exts.M16 series to M53 series. From the side of the

management one witness was examined as MW1 and

Exts.M1 to M15 were marked. After closing the evidence

the arguments for both sides were heard.

8.

The points for determination are:-

(i)

Whether the reference is maintainable?

(ii)

Whether the dismissal of the workman from

the services of the management bank is legal

and proper?

(iii)

Whether the penalty of dismissal imposed on

the workman calls for any interference by this

Tribunal?

(iv)

To what relief, if any, the workman is entitled

to?

9.

Point No. (i) : Challenge as to the maintainability is

made on the ground that the claims became stale due to

the inordinate delay in raising this industrial dispute. It is

after a period of twelve years after the order of dismissal

the dispute was raised by the workman. After taking the

decision by the management to dismiss him from service

Ext.M6 notice dated 30.03.1996 was sent to him through

registered post. It was also published in the Mathrubhumi

daily on 04.04.1996. After the dismissal he had given Ext.M8

representation dated 10.04.1996 with the prayer not to

proceed with the termination of his service and to permit

him to rejoin duty. In reply to it the management issued

Ext.M9 letter dated 23.04.1996 informing him that he was

dismissed from service w.e.f. 04.04.1996 and advising him

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6239

to appeal against the punishment imposed to the Board of

Directors of the Bank, if he so desires. Afterwards on

06.04.1999 he preferred an appeal challenging the order of

dismissal. Ext.M10 is the appeal petition submitted by

him. The appeal was dismissed on 19.05.1999. He was

informed about the dismissal of the appeal vide letter dated

27.05.1999 marked as Ext.M11. It was received by him on

15.06.1999 and the same is evidenced by Ext.M12.

Afterwards he had filed OP No.7246/2002(K) before the

Hon’ble High Court of Kerala challenging the dismissal

on 11.02.2002. It was closed without prejudice to the right

to seek legal redress, if any as per judgment dated

13.07.2005 copy of which is marked as Ext.M13.

10.

Pointing out the delay in filing the appeal, and the

OP before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala as well as the

inordinate delay of 12 years in raising the industrial dispute

it was argued by the learned counsel for the management

that the claim became stale at the time of raising the dispute.

It was also submitted by him that the dispute was raised

only after 2½ years after the disposal of the above OP.

11.

By placing reliance on the decisions reported in

Nedungadi Bank Ltd. Vs. Madhavankutty AIR 2000 SC

839, Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Prahlad Sing AIR 2001

SC 69, Haryana State Coop. Land Development Bank Vs.

Neelam AIR 2005 SC 1843 and UP State Road Transport

Corporation Vs. Ram Singh and Another 2008 (17) SCC

627 it was argued by him that the delay in raising the

dispute in this case disentitles the workman to claim any

relief since the dispute has become stale. On the other

hand it was argued by the learned counsel for the workman

that the provisions of the Limitation Act are not applicable

to the proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act and

workman is entitled to relief even if there is delay. Reliance

was placed by him on the decision reported in Ajaib Singh

Vs. Sirhind Coop. Marketing cum Processing Service

Society AIR 1999 SC 1351.

12.

In the decision referred to by the learned counsel

for the workman it was held that Article 137 of the Limitation

Act is not applicable to the Industrial Disputes Act and

the workman is entitled to relief even if there is delay.

13.

In Nedungadi Bank Ltd. Vs. Madhavankutty referred

to by the learned counsel for the management it was held:

“Law does not prescribe any time limit for the

appropriate Government to exercise its powers under

S.10 of the Act. It is not that this power can be

exercised at any point of time and to revive matters

which had since been settled. Power is to be

exercised reasonably and in a rational manner. There

appears to us to be no rational basis on which the

Central Govt. has exercised powers in this case after

a lapse of about seven years of order dismissing the

respondent from service. At the time reference was

made no industrial dispute existed or could be even

said to have been apprehended. A dispute which is

stale could not be the subject matter of reference

under S.10 of the Act. As to when a dispute can be

said to be stale would depend on the facts and

circumstances of each case. When the matter has

become final, it appears to us to be rather

incongruous that the reference be made under S.10

of the Act in the circumstances like the present one.

In fact it could be said that there was no dispute

pending at the time when the reference in question

was made”.

14.

In Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Prahlad Singh it

was held that in the case of an industrial dispute raised

after thirteen long years of termination of service without

reasonable explanation for such delay the Industrial

Tribunal can refuse to grant any relief.

15.

In Haryana State Coop. Land Development Bank

Vs. Neelam it was held that the object of imparting social

justice to the workman is not to automatically entitle a

workman to relief against the employer, irrespective of his

conduct and that the aim and object of the Industrial

Disputes Act may be to impart social justice to the

workman but the same by itself would not mean that

irrespective of his conduct a workman would automatically

be entitled to relief. The decision of Ajaib Singh referred

to by the learned counsel for the workman was considered

in that decision and it was held that it was rendered in the

fact situation obtaining therein and no ratio of universal

application can be culled out therefrom after pointing out

that the management did not raise any plea of delay in that

case.

16.

In UP State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Ram

Singh and Another it was pointed out that it was repeatedly

laid down in several decisions that while delay cannot by

itself be sufficient reason to reject an industrial dispute,

nevertheless the delay cannot be unreasonable and mere

fact that the workman was making repeated representations

would not justify his raising the issue before the Labour

Court after thirteen years.

17.

The provisions of the Limitation Act are not

applicable to the Industrial Tribunal. There is no prescribed

time limit for making reference. But it must be within a

reasonable time. There shall not be inordinate delay in

raising the industrial dispute by the workman. The

industrial dispute must exist at that time. In the above

referred decisions it has been categorically held that the

raising of the industrial dispute and its reference must be

within a reasonable time. It shall not be at any point of

time and if otherwise the records pertaining to an employee

might have been destroyed and it would be difficult to

obtain witnesses who be competent to give evidence so

6240

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

many years later if the Industrial Tribunal or Labour Court

wishes to hold a further enquiry into the matter.

18.

Here in this case admittedly the dismissal was on

04.04.1996. The appeal was filed by the workman

challenging the dismissal only after three years. After

receipt of the copy of the order dismissing the appeal, the

OP was filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala after

about three years. After the dismissal of the OP on

13.07.2005 leaving him to seek legal redress, if any, the

dispute was raised by him only on 09.01.2008. It is about

twelve years after the dismissal the industrial dispute was

raised by him. There is no satisfactory explanation for the

inordinate delay in raising the dispute. It appears that it is

because of the lukewarm attitude of the workman that has

resulted in the undue delay in raising the dispute. He

could have raised the dispute within a reasonable time

after the dismissal of the appeal. Instead he had

approached the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala after a period

of about three years. Even after the disposal of the OP he

had not taken care to raise the industrial dispute for more

than 2½ years. There is unreasonable and unexplained

delay in raising the industrial dispute and hence it can be

held that the claim has become stale.

19.

Point No.(ii) : The validity of the order of dismissal

is mainly challenged on the ground that it was imposed

without conducting enquiry. Learned counsel for the

workman has submitted that it can only be treated as

termination from service as there was no enquiry. On the

other hand learned counsel for the management has argued

that there is no need to conduct an enquiry since the

penalty of dismissal was imposed on him by invoking the

power invested with the management under clause 30(2)

of the South Malabar Gramin Bank (Staff Service

Regulations, 1980) governing the service of the workman.

20.

Clause 30(1) to (3) of the said Regulations deals

with the penalties and the procedure to be followed for

the imposition of penalties. It reads thus:

“30(1)Without prejudice to the provisions of other

regulations,

an officer or employee who commits a breach of

these regulations or who displays negligence,

inefficiency or indolence, or who knowingly does

anything detrimental to the interests of the Bank or

in conflict with its instructions or who commits a

breach of discipline or is guilty of any other act of

misconduct, shall be liable to the following

penalties—

(a)

reprimand;

(b)

delay or stoppage of increments or promotion;

(c)

degradation to a lower post or grade or to a

lower stage in his incremental scale;

(d)

recovery from pay of the whole or part of any

pecuniary loss caused to the Bank by the

officer or employee;

(e)

removal from service which shall not be a

disqualification for future employment;

(f)

dismissal.

(2)

No officer or employee shall be subjected to the

penalties

referred to in clause (b), (c) (d), (e) or (f) of sub-

regulation (1) except by an order in writing signed

by the Chairman and no such order shall be passed

without the charge being formulated in writing and

given to the said officer or employee so that he shall

have reasonable opportunity to answer them in

writing or in person, as he prefers and in the latter

case his defence shall be taken down in writing and

read to him:

Provided that the requirements of this sub-regulation

may be waived, if the facts on the basis of which

action is to be taken have been established in a

court of law or court martial, or where the officer or

employee has absconded or where it is for any other

reason impracticable to communicate with him or

where there is difficulty in observing them and the

requirements can be waived without injustice to him.

In every case where all or any of the requirements of

this sub-regulation are waived, the reasons for so

doing shall be recorded in writing.

(3)

The inquiry under this regulation and the procedure

with the exception of the final order, may be delegated

in case the person against whom proceedings are

taken is an officer to any officer who is in grade

higher than such officer and in the case of an

employee to any officer. For purposes of the inquiry,

the officer or employee may not engage a legal

practitioner”.

21.

As per clause 30(2) the penalty of dismissal shall

not be imposed without a charge being formulated in

writing and given to the employee so as to have reasonable

opportunity to answer them in writing, or if in person, his

defence shall be taken down in writing and read to him.

The proviso further provides that the requirements can be

waived in certain circumstances. It can be waived if he

has absconded or it is for any other reason impracticable

to communicate with him.

22.

By placing reliance on the decisions reported in

Syndicate Bank Vs. General Secretary, Syndicate Bank Staff

Association and Another AIR 2000 SC 2198 and Regional

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6241

Manager, Bank of Baroda Vs. Anita Nandrajog 2009 (9)

SCC 462 it was argued by the learned counsel for the

management that it is not necessary to conduct an enquiry

if the principles of natural justice are inbuilt in the

provisions providing the procedure for termination or for

imposition of penalty. In the former decision referred to

by him it was held that the requirements of natural justice

stood satisfied even without holding a departmental

enquiry. The requirements of natural justice are considered

in para 16 of the judgment which reads thus :

“Now what are the requirements of principles of

natural justice, which are required to be observed?

These are:

(i)

A workman should know the nature of the

complaint or accusation;

(ii)

An opportunity to state his case; and

(iii)

The management should act in good faith

which means that the action of the

management should be fair, reasonable and

just”.

23.

In the latter case the legality of voluntary cessation

of service as per clause 17(b) of the Fifth Bipartite Settlement

was considered without conducting enquiry and held that

the termination is valid even without conducting an

enquiry.

24.

By placing reliance on the decisions reported in The

Workmen of M/s.Firestone Tyre & Rubber Co. of India P.

Ltd. Vs. The Management and others AIR 1973 SC 1227

and Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. etc. Vs. Gujarat Steel Tubes

Mazdoor Sabha and others AIR 1980 SC 1896 it was argued

by the learned counsel for the workman that it is obligatory

on the part of the employer to conduct an enquiry in the

case of imposition of punishment for misconduct.

25.

Clause 30(2) of the said Regulations do not expressly

provide for the conduct of an enquiry for the imposition

of the penalties under sub-clauses (b), (c), (d), (e) or (f) of

Clause 30(1) of the said Regulations. What is provided is

to formulate a charge in writing and to afford a reasonable

opportunity to the workman to answer. It does not mean

that no enquiry is to be conducted in all the cases of

imposition of penalty. It all depends upon the facts and

circumstances of each case. There may be cases when

the workman admits the charges levelled against him which

does not call for any enquiry. But when there is denial of

charges and the supporting allegations, it will become

necessary to conduct an enquiry otherwise it cannot be

said that reasonable opportunity was given to the

workman to state his case and hence there will be violation

of the principles of natural justice.

26.

It was argued by the learned counsel for the

management that the requirements under clause 30(1) is

not to be complied with in this case since it was

impracticable to communicate with the workman prior to

and after the issuance of Ext.M1, which expressly states

the charges levelled against him. It was also argued by

him that the workman fully admits the contents of Ext.M1

in Ext.M3 reply given by him and hence it does not invite

any enquiry.

27. There are specific allegations in Ext.M1 as to the

violation of the provisions of the Regulations by the

workman and also as to his misconduct. It is expressly

stated there in that it has become impracticable to

communicate with him. There are clear allegations as to

his habitual absenteeism from duties without obtaining

permission from the competent authority. It is expressly

stated therein that he had absented from duties for 162

days on ten occasions from 17.10.1993 to 23.07.1994 and

afterwards for 61 days from 24.07.1994 to 22.09.1994. There

is also specific mention that his absence from 23.09.1994

to 30.11.1994 was treated as absence without leave and

his request for leave from 01.12.1994 to 31.01.1995 was

rejected. It is also pointed out that the letter dated

15.12.1994 directing him to appear before Dr.T Bhargavan,

Civil Surgeon at 4:00 PM on 22.12.1994 for medical

examination and several other letters were returned with

reason “unclaimed, returned to sender”.

28.

Though Ext.M1 is styled as a show-cause notice it

would disclose the clear violation of the provisions of the

said Regulations as well as the misconduct of the workman.

There is no vagueness in the allegations contained in it.

Based on the decisions reported in Krishna Chandra

Tandon Vs. Union of India AIR1974 SC 1589 and

St.Thomas Missions Hospital Vs. State of Kerala &

Another 2007 (2) KLT 415 it can very well be held that the

charges are made specific without any ambiguity in Ext.M1

and hence it can be accepted as the charges levelled

against the workman though not styled as a charge sheet.

29.

In Ext.M3 reply the specific allegations in Ext.M1 as

to the absenteeism without permission and the

impracticability to communicate with him are admitted. He

would further admit that there was change of address and

seek pardon for his failure to inform it to the management.

The reason for absenteeism is stated to be severe attack

of rheumatic fever from 17.10.1993 and paralysis for quite

a long period. There is also the request for granting eligible

leave or leave on loss of pay for the period of his absence

in spite of the specific mention of treating his absence

from 23.09.1994 to 30.11.1994 as absence without leave

and as to the rejection of leave for the period from

01.12.1994 to 31.01.1995 in Ext.M1. There is also the

undertaking that he would not absent himself from duty

without permission in future.

30.

It was impracticable to communicate with him is

admitted to by the workman and in such a case the

6242

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

management can waive the requirements to be complied

with as per clause 30(2) of the said regulations.

31.

In Ext.M8 letter addressed to the Chairman by the

workman pursuant to the receipt of the communication as

to his dismissal it is expressly stated that in his explanation

dated 07.08.1995 it was submitted by him that he was

compelled to enter on leave without prior permission from

the competent authority. It is further stated that he could

not submit leave application in time as he was under

observation and treatment for chronic rheumatic

complaints. Therein also he made request for not

terminating him after undertaking that there would not be

any kind of such misconducts in his future service.

32.

As there is express admission of the chronic

absenteeism as well as the breach of the provisions of the

said Regulations the management can invoke the power

under Section 30(2) for the imposition of the penalty

without conducting enquiry especially in view of the

impracticability to communicate with him.

33.

In Himachal Road Transport Corporation and

Another Vs. Hukam Chand 2009(11) SCC 222 it was held

by the Apex Court that when there is employee’s own

admission of misconduct enquiry is not necessary.

34.

While considering the question of unauthorized

absence from duty by the workman it is relevant to go

through clause 22(1) and (2) of the said Regulations. It

reads thus:-

“22(1) An officer or employee shall not absent

himself from his duties without having obtained the

permission of the competent authority, nor shall be

absent himself in case of sickness or accident without

submitting a proper medical certificates.

(2) An officer or employee who absents himself from

duty without leave or overstays his leave, except

under circumstances beyond his control for which

he must tender a satisfactory explanation, shall not

be entitled to draw any pay and allowances for the

period of such absence or overstayal, and shall

further be liable to such disciplinary measure as the

competent authority may impose”.

35.

It is also necessary to look into the provisions with

regard to privilege leave and sick leave. Clause 46 deals

with privilege leave and it reads as follows:-

“46(1) Applications for privilege leave shall

ordinarily be submitted by the officer or employee

at least one month before the date from which leave

is required.

(2) Applications which do not satisfy the

requirements of sub-regulation (1) may be refused

without reason being stated”.

36.

Clause 50 dealing with sick leave reads thus :

“50. An officer or employee shall be eligible to 20

days of sick leave for each completed year of service.

Such leave can be accumulated up to 180 days and

may be availed of only on production of medical

certificate by a medical practitioner acceptable to

the Bank or, at the Bank’s discretion, nominated by

it at its cost”.

37.

As per clause 17 of the said Regulations every officer

or employee of the Bank shall conform to and abide by

these regulations and shall observe, comply with and obey

all orders and directions which may from time to time be

given to him by any person or persons under whose

jurisdiction, superintendence or control he may for the

time being be placed.

38.

In the case of the workman there is the admission as

to shifting of residence without informing the bank. As

per clause 23 of the said regulations an officer or employee

if so required by the competent authority, must not absent

himself from his station overnight without obtaining

previous sanction from the Chairman if he himself holds

the post of a Manager and from the Officer-in-charge or

Manager in other cases.

39.

Here in this case the failure to conduct enquiry does

not affect materially for the above said reasons. Apart

from that both workman and management have adduced

evidence before this tribunal in support of their respective

pleas. It is the case of the workman that he had absented

himself from duty from 17.10.1993 continuously on several

occasions due to rheumatic arthritis and he had submitted

leave applications for his absence during the entire period.

Pursuant to the direction given by this Tribunal to the

management as per the request made by the workman for

production of the leave applications and the medical

certificates management has produced all the leave

applications and medical certificates and the same were

marked as Exts.M16 series to M53 series. There was no

request for producing the order granting or rejecting those

leave applications. In Exts.M3 and M7 the reason stated

for his unauthorized absence is that he was bed ridden

due to rheumatic arthritis from 17.10.1993. In the claim

statement also there is the specific plea that it is because

of rheumatic arthritis he was absenting from duty. He has

no case that it was for any other reason he had absented

himself from attending duty. But on production of those

leave applications it has come out that it was not because

of rheumatic arthritis he was absenting from duties.

Exts.M16 series to M38 series are the leave applications

submitted by him for his absence on several occasions

during the period from 17.10.1993 to 31.01.1995. It is with

regard to the unauthorized absence during that period

Ext.M1 was issued to him to submit his explanation. The

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6243

reason stated in any one of those leave applications is not

rheumatic arthritis. It is interesting to note that the reason

for leave stated in Exts.M19 and M20 for availing leave

from 20.12.1993 to 24.12.1993 is Sabarimala pilgrimage. In

several leave applications sickness is stated to be the

reason for leave. From the medical certificates

accompanying with those leave applications it can be seen

that he was not undergoing treatment for rheumatic arthritis

at that time. During the cross-examination of the workman

when examined as WW1 it was stated by him that it was

only in the year 1995 he was found to have been affected

by rheumatic arthritis. For the purpose of deciding this

case it is only to be considered whether he was

unauthorisedly absenting himself during the period from

17.10.1993 to 31.01.1995. It was admitted by him during

his cross-examination that for his absence for 162 days

during the period from October, 1993 to July, 1994 order

was issued to him treating those 162 days as absence

without leave on loss of pay. It was stated by him that he

did not remember whether any appeal was filed or any

other step was taken challenging that order. It was admitted

by him that leave applications were submitted on several

occasions after availing the leave. There is also evidence

to prove that there was no leave in his credit at the time of

submitting some of the leave applications.

40.

In the proof affidavit of MW1 there are specific

averments as to his unauthorized absence of 162 days

from 17.10.1993 to 23.07.1994 on ten occasions. Further it

is averred that it was treated as absence without leave on

loss of pay by order dated 01.08.1994. No challenge has

been made about it during his cross-examination. There is

also the averment in his proof affidavit that from 07.07.1994

to 06.06.1995 the workman was continuously absenting

from duties for 335 days and that it was treated as absence

without leave on loss of pay after issuing several letters

to him for his non-adherence to leave rules. There is no

challenge with regard to it during his cross-examination.

The averment in the proof affidavit of MW1 that during

the period from 17.10.1993 to 10.11.1996 the workman was

absent without leave unauthorisedly on loss of pay for a

total of 535 days also stands unchallenged during his

cross-examination.

41.

According to the workman he had submitted leave

applications on all the occasions before or after availing

the leave. Submission of leave application by itself is not

sufficient for availing the leave. In the decision reported

in Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Sardar Singh AIR 2004

SC 4161 it was held that when an employee absents himself

from duty without sanctioned leave, the authority can come

to a conclusion about the employee being habitually

negligent in duties and an exhibited lack of interest in the

employer’s work.

42.

The entitlement of an employee is to apply for leave.

The grant of leave is a condition for its enjoyment. Leave

not granted cannot be availed and enjoyed. In this case

there is sufficient evidence to prove that there was rejection

of leave applications submitted by the workman during

the relevant period.

43.

There is ample evidence in this case to prove that

the workman was unauthorisedly absenting himself from

duty on several occasions during the period from

17.10.1993 to 31.01.1995. It is also proved that there is

clear violation of the provisions contained in the said

regulations by him. Taking into consideration of the

continuous absence of duty unauthorisedly on several

occasions by the workman in between the period from

17.10.1993 to 31.01.1995 without prior permission

management has got the right to invoke the power under

clause 30(2) of the said regulations to impose the penalty

of dismissal.

44.

Point No. (iii) : Workman was imposed with the

penalty of dismissal for his chronic absenteeism without

prior permission. It cannot be said to be termination of

service coming within the purview of clause 10(2) of the

said Regulations. He was absenting himself prior to the

issuance of Ext.M1 and also afterwards. Exts.W1 to W24

were produced from the side of the workman to satisfy

that his work was very much appreciated during the period

from 1990 to 1992. It was argued by the learned counsel

for the workman that it also requires consideration in the

matter of imposition of penalty. Learned counsel for the

management submitted that the workman was imposed

with the penalty of barring two increments after conducting

an enquiry with regard to the violation of instructions

given to him for not issuing cheques without sufficient

funds in his account. It was also submitted that he was

convicted in a criminal case charged against him for

pledging spurious gold ornaments in the Thamarassery

branch of the Canara Bank. The barring of increments

after conducting enquiry is not disputed by the workman.

It was stated by him during his cross-examination that he

was acquitted in the criminal case by the Sessions Court,

Kozhikode. The penalty imposed by the management is

to be interfered with only when it is shockingly

disproportionate to the alleged misconduct. Taking into

consideration of the entire facts and circumstances there

is no reason to interfere with the penalty imposed on the

workman. Hence I find that the action of the management

of South Malabar Gramin Bank in imposing the penalty of

dismissal from the services w.e.f.04.04.1996 on the workman

is justified.

45.

Point No.(iv) : In the result an award is passed

holding that the action of the management in imposing

the penalty of dismissal on the workman from service is

justified. Hence he is not entitled to any relief.

6244

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

The award will come into force one month after its

publication in the Official Gazette.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and

typed by her, corrected and passed by me on this the 22nd

day of July, 2014.

D. SREEVALLABHAN, Presiding Officer

APPENDIX

Witness for the workman

WW1

07.06.2013

Shri K Vijayan

Witness for the management

MW1

30.12.2013

Shri C G Sethumadhavan

Exhibits for the workman

W1

-

Appreciation letter dated 08.03.1990 issued

by the Senior Manager of the management

bank to the workman

W2

-

Appreciation letter dated 12.03.1990 issued

by the Senior Manager of the management

bank to the workman

W3

-

Greeting letter dated 09.03.1990 issued by

the General Manager of the management

bank to the workman

W4

-

Greeting letter dated 31.03.1990 issued by

the General Manager of the management

bank to the workman

W5

-

Greeting letter dated 31.05.1990 issued by

the General Manager of the management

bank to the workman

W6

-

Greeting letter dated 17.07.1990 issued by

the General Manager of the management

bank to the workman

W7

-

Greeting letter dated 12.09.1990 issued by

the General Manager of the management

bank to the workman

W8

-

Copy of Circular No.Dev.Cir.155/90-91

dated 07.11.1990 issued by the General

Manager of the management bank

W9

-

Letter dated 09.11.1990 addressed to the

workman by the Senior Manager of the

management bank

W10

-

Greeting letter dated 28.11.1990 issued by

the General Manager of the management

bank to the workman

W11

-

Copy of Circular No.Dev.Cir.180/90-91:P&D

dated 17.12.1990 issued by the General

Manager of the management bank

W12

-

Letter dated 19.12.1990 addressed to the

workman by the Senior Manager of the

management bank

W13

-

Copy of Circular No.Dev.Cir.217/90-91

dated 12.01.1991 issued by the General

Manager of the management bank

W14

-

Letter dated 15.01.1991 addressed to the

workman by the Senior Manager of the

management bank

W15

-

Copy of Circular No.Dev.Cir.245/90-91

dated 04.02.1991 issued by the General

Manager of the management bank

W16

-

Greeting Letter dated 26.02.1991 issued by

the Senior Manager (Planning & Dev.

Section) of the management bank to the

workman

W17

-

Greeting Letter dated 28.02.1991 issued by

the Senior Manager(Planning & Dev.

Section) of the management bank to the

workman

W18

-

Greeting Letter dated 01.06.1991 issued by

the Senior Manager (Planning & Dev.

Section) of the management bank to the

workman

W19

-

Invitation letter dated 12.08.1991 addressed

to the workman by the Area Manager of

the management bank

W20

-

Appreciation letter dated 07.03.1992 issued

by the Area Manager of the management

bank to the workman

W21

-

True photocopy of Certificate of Merit

dated Nil issued by the Chairman of the

management bank to the workman

W22

-

True photocopy of Certificate of Merit

dated Nil issued by the Chairman of the

management bank to the workman

W23

-

Greeting letter dated 09.06.1992 issued by

the General Manager of the management

bank to the workman

W24

-

Greeting letter dated 31.01.1994 issued by

the Area Manager of the management bank

to the workman

W25

-

True photocopy of Show Cause Notice

dated 31.01.1995 issued by the Chairman

of the management bank to the workman

W26

-

True photocopy of reply dated 07.08.1995

submitted by the workman to the Chairman

of the management bank

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6245

W27

-

True photocopy of notice dated 30.03.1996

W28

-

True photocopy of representation dated

10.04.1996 submitted by the workman to

the Chairman of the management bank

W29

-

True copy of letter No.9/SMGB/E.149/76/

96-97/IR dated 23.04.1996 of the Chairman

of the management bank to the workman

W30

-

True copy of the appeal petition dated

06.04.1999 filed by the workman before the

Appellate Authority

W31

-

True copy of the Judgment dated

13.07.2005 in OP No.7246/2002(K) of the

Hon’ble High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam

W32

-

True copy of the letter dated 09.01.2008

addressed to the Assistant Labour

Commissioner, Kochi by the workman

Exhibits for the management

M1

-

Show Cause notice dated 31.01.1995 issued

to the workman by the Chairman of the

management bank

M2

-

True copy of South Malabar Gramin Bank

(Staff) Service Regulations 1980 with

Amendment Regulations-1982

M3

-

Reply dated 07.08.1995 submitted by the

workman to the Chairman of the

management bank

M4

-

Letter dated 03.04.1996 addressed to the

workman by the Chairman of the

management bank

M5

-

Acknowledgment Card dated 15.04.1996

M6

-

Notice dated 30.03.1996 issued by the

Chairman (Disciplinary authority) of the

management bank to the workman

M7

-

Paper publication in the Kozhikode edition

of the Mathrubhumi Daily dated 04.04.1996

M8

-

Representation dated 10.04.1996 submitted

to the Chairman of the management bank

by the workman

M9

-

Letter No.9/SMGB/E.149/76/96-97/IR dated

23.04.1996 issued by the Chairman

(Disciplinary Authority) of the management

bank to the workman

M10

-

Appeal petition dated 06.04.1999 filed by

the workman before the management bank

M11

-

Letter dated 27.05.1999 addressed to the

workman by the General Manager of the

management bank

M12

-

Acknowledgment Card dated 02.06.1999

M13

-

True copy of the Judgment in OP No.7246/

2002(K) dated 13.07.2005 of the Hon’ble

High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam

M14

-

Letter dated 10.06.1996 addressed to the

Industrial Relations Cell, South Malabar

Gramin Bank, Malappuram by the Manager/

Accountant, Thamarassery Branch of the

Canara Bank

M15

-

Letter dated 25.07.1996 addressed to the

Industrial Relations Cell, South Malabar

Gramin Bank, Malappuram by the

Accountant/Manager, Thamarassery

Branch of the Canara Bank

M16

-

Leave application dated 06.11.1993

M16 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 17.10.1993

M16 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 16.11.1993

M17

-

Leave application dated 04.12.1993

M18

-

Leave application dated 14.12.1993

M19

-

Leave application dated 18.12.1993

M-20

-

Leave application dated 27.12.1993

M-21

-

Leave application dated 05.02.1994

M-21 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 01.02.1994

M-22

-

Leave application dated 11.02.1994

M-22 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 11.02.1994

M-23

-

Leave application dated 21.02.1994

M-23 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 21.02.1994

M-24

-

Leave application dated 27.02.1994

M-24 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 27.02.1994

M-25

-

Leave application dated 06.03.1994

M-25 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 09.03.1994

M-26

-

Leave application dated 01.04.1994

M-26 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 01.04.1994

M-27

-

Leave application dated 18.04.1994

M-27 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 18.04.1994

M-27 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 01.05.1994

M-28

-

Leave application dated 02.06.1994

M-28 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 30.05.1994

M-28 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 02.06.1994

M-29

-

Leave application dated 07.06.1994

M-29 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 04.06.1994

6246

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

M-29 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 07.06.1994

M-30

-

Leave application dated 23.06.1994

M-30 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 21.06.1994

M-30 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 23.06.1994

M-31

-

Leave application dated 04.07.1994

M-31 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 27.06.1994

M-31 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 03.07.1994

M-32

-

Leave application dated 07.07.1994

M-32 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 07.07.1994

M-33

-

Leave application dated 12.07.1994

M-33 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 12.07.1994

M-34

-

Leave application dated 17.07.1994

M-34 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 17.07.1994

M-35

-

Leave application dated 05.09.1994

M-35 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 24.07.1994

M-36

-

Leave application dated 23.09.1994

M-36 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 23.09.1994

M-37

-

Leave application dated 23.10.1994

M-37 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 23.10.1994

M-38

-

Leave application dated 01.12.1994

M-38 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 01.12.1994

M-39

-

Leave application dated 01.02.1995

M-39 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 01.02.1995

M-40

-

Leave application dated 01.04.1995

M-40 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 01.04.1995

M-41

-

Leave application dated 01.05.1995

M-41 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 01.05.1995

M-42

-

Leave application dated 07.06.1995

M-42 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 31.05.1995

M-42 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 07.06.1995

M-43

-

Leave application dated 26.07.1995

M-43 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 21.06.1995

M-43 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 26.07.1995

M-44

-

Leave application dated 26.12.1995

M-44 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 23.12.1995

M-44 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 24.12.1995

M-45

-

Leave application dated 28.12.1995

M-45 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 27.12.1995

M-45 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 28.12.1995

M-46

-

Leave application dated 16.01.1996

M-46 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 11.01.1996

M-46 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 12.01.1996

M-47

-

Leave application dated 19.01.1996

M-47 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 17.01.1996

M-47 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 19.01.1996

M-48

-

Leave application dated 23.01.1996

M-48 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 20.01.1996

M-48 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 21.01.1996

M-49

-

Leave application dated 25.01.1996

M-49 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 24.01.1996

M-49 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 25.01.1996

M-50

-

Leave application dated 29.01.1996

M-50 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 29.01.1996

M-50 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 30.01.1996

M-51

-

Leave application dated 08.02.1996

M-51 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 31.01.1996

M-52

-

Leave application dated 02.03.1996

M-52 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 17.02.1996

M-53

-

Leave application dated 08.01.1996

M-53 (a)

-

Medical Certificate dated 02.01.1996

M-53 (b)

-

Fitness Certificate dated 07.01.1996

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2464-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj bySfDVªdy

yksdks lsM xkse iwoZ eè; jsyos izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj

muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

72@2007) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&41012@1@2006&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2464.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 72/

2007) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

N0. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial

dispute between the management of Electric Loco Shed

Gomoh, Eastern Central Railway and their workmen,

received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014

[No. L-41012/1/2006-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6247

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2), AT DHANBAD.

PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer.

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1)(d)

of the I.D.Act.,1947.

REFERENCE No. 72 OF 2007

PARTIES : Sri Gautam Kumar & others

At: Kerktha, PO: Gomoh,

Distt: Dhanbad (Jharkhand)

Vs.

The D.E.E.,

Electric Loco Shed Gomoh,

E.C. Railway, Gomoh,

Dhanbad.

Ministry’s Order No. L-41012/1/2006-IR(B-I) dt.11.12.2007

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of the workman/Union : Mr. Sumiran Pal

Ld. Advocate

On behalf of the Management

: Mr. M. M. Khan,

Ld. Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Railways

Dated, Dhanbad, the 11th July, 2014

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in

exercise of the powers conferred on them under

Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act.,1947 has referred the following

dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order

No.L-41012/1/2006-IR (B-I) dt.11.12.2007.

SCHEDULE

“Whether the engagement of the 24 workers by the

Management for maintenance of Locos in, Electric

Loco Shed Gomoh, Eastern Central Railway, through

contractor for 5 years, which is permanent nature

job, their termination, and not providing employment

is justified and fair? If not, so what relief

Management can provide to them.

On receipt of the Order No. L-41012/1/2006-IR (B-I)

dt.11.12.2007 of the above mentioned reference from the

Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment,

New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference

Case No.72-2007 of was registered on 6.12.2008 and

accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue

notices through the Registered Posts to the parties

concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the

date fixed, and to file their written statements along with

the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order,

notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties

concerned.

Both the parties made their appearances and filed

their pleadings and photocopies of their documents. The

Union and the O.P./Management through their

Representatives/Advocate, and contested the case,

respectively.

2.

Irrespective of repetitions and noted rulings, the

case of workmen Gautam Kumar & 23 others as stated in

their written statement is that they had been continuously

performing the work of repair and maintenance, the job pf

permanent nature in the twenty two Electric Locos

imported form Switzerland in the Loco Shed, Gomoh under

the E.C. Rly. under the supervision control of the Rly.

Officers from 1996 to Oct./Dec. 2002, after undergoing the

special training from ABB Locos. Though their

engagement was in a prohibited category of repair and

maintenance job under the Contract Labour (Regulation

and Abolition) Act, they were issued their Identity Cards

by the Loco Shed Officers, namely the Sr.Section Engineer,

and over controller of Sr. D.E.E. of the Entire work. for the

said jobs for about six years. They have their own year of

joining activity undergone and educational qualifications

referred respectively against their names of the Annexure-A.

The work was within the electric Loco Shed under the E.C.

Rly. under a project of the Indian Rly. named “TR GP-140

Locomotive Project. During the warranty period of 5 years,

the Swedish Experts were also looking after maintenance

of the Locos, theirafter to enable the Indian Rly. E.C. Rly.

Staffs to continue their maintenance, the workmen were

selected through an agency M/s. Prakash Contractors Pvt.

Ltd., and were deputed/engaged to work in the electric

Loco Shed under the E.C. Rly., Gomoh.All the workmen’s

performance of the job was satisfactory to all the

concerned. The job done by them was perennial and

permanent nature. They were assured of their absorption

and regularization. The Rly. Administration was the

recipient of the benefits of their services for a considerable

period, and they are legally the employees of the E.C. Rly.,

as they get the benefit of EPF Scheme 1952.In this case

the principal employer is the Rly. as real one but not the

immediate contractor. But without any chagesheet or any

department enquiry, some workmen in Oct., 2002 and some

ones in Dec., 2002 were terminated unreasonly.Taking the

same job through other Rly. Employees are depriving the

workmen of their regularization in the job. Various corrupt

and illegal practices of taking the work through outsiders

in connivance with the Rly.Authorities concerned are

prevailing in the Loco Shed whereas it needs the trained

persons like the workmen.

Further alleged by the workmen is that twenty two

locos were the property of the Indian Railway, it had the

primary responsibility and duty to maintain them. Some

Engineers only during the five years’ warranty period were

deputed by the Company at their cost for their maintenance

work. The maintenance and repair of the 22 Locos is a job

6248

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

of permanent and continuous nature for which the services

of the workmen are inevitably required. The Railway

Officers/Supervisors are legally responsible for their

dereliction in the maintenance of the said imported Locos,

if they have not supervised and controlled it. Obviously

the working of the workmen for about six years beyond

the warranty period clearly establishes a legal relationship

between the persons employed to work in an Industry

and the owner of it, irrespective of the relationship created

by the act of the principal/Master or by that of his

authorized agent. Even when a worker is hired in or in

respect of the work of an establishment by a contractor

for his undertaking to produce a result or for supplies of

workmen for any work of the establishment, the factor of

the contractor may be a contract of warranty, is a mere

comouflage.The workmen are trained and experienced in

the work of the Locos, they have no possibility of their

any employment anywhere other than the Railways. The

satisfaction of the Railway Officers with the repair and

maintenance is the prime, but no value of the ABB

Company’s certification. As the Administration control of

Safety and Security of the running of the Locos dependent

on their repair and maintenance surely belongs to the

Railway Admn.The Sr.D.E.E., E.C.Rly, Gomoh, used to send

the workmen to different places: Chittaranjan, Ghaziabad

for repair and maintenance of the Locos. The workmen

were never made aware of the terms and conditions between

the Railway Admn. and the ABB Company, but the Rly.

Admn. Is the main beneficiary of their aforesaid services

in the maintenance of the Locos directly under all the

control of the Railway, their right to their absorption in it

cannot be denied under the camouflage of the contractor.

Likewise the existence of other trained Supervisor and

Staffs under the Rly. Admn. for the maintenance of the

Locos can not deprive the workmen of their accrued right

to their regularization and absorption.

3.

The workmen in their rejoinder have categorically

denied all the allegations of the O.P./Management as

vague, further stating that at appearance of the 24 workmen

with their certificates of trade and qualification in the

interview taken by Sri Jitendra Jha,the then Sr. Divisional

Electrical Engineer,TS Gomoh Electric Loco Shed, they were

selected. At purchase of the ABB Locos by the Indian

Railway through Rly.Board from Switzerland under the

terms and conditions of 5 years warranty, Sr. D.E.E.,

Jitendra Ojha, Elct. Engineer U.S.Ojha and Asst. Engineer

Ghosh were trained in Switzerland for the maintenance of

ABB Locos, and the Engineers had also came from the

ABB, they jointly trained the workmen who began to work

in the Gomoh Electric Loco Shed under the supervision of

the Railway Supervision satisfactory to the Rly. Engineers.

There was neither name nor role of any contractor/Agent

in that regard performance of the workmen’s escorting

duty with the highly sophisticated Locos of 3 phase A.C.

from Gomoh to Delhi or from Gomoh to Howrah was an

inevitable test to the adaptability of the sophisticated ABB

Locos of pressure locomotive engines on the Indian

Railway Tracks in the Indian Climatic conditions. They

worked under all Sr.D.E.E. Jitendra Jha ,Bhardwaj and

K.N.Singh.The nature of the job warrants no employment

through a contractor. They were paid their salary for their

continued service for 7 years from 1996 to 2003. They

were recruited as Rly employees but not properly. The

gradual picking up of the job by same new hand as existing

staff of the Rly. following termination of the qualified

trained persons can not deprive the latter workmen of their

claim for regularization/absorption.

4.

Whereas the contra pled case of the O.P./

Management with categorical denials is that the Railway

purchased the Locos from Switzerland for their won use in

the Train Services for benefit. The Loco shed already

furnished with the staff of different category is for the

purposes of the Loco maintenance. Some officers and

Supervisors were given training for it in Switzerland. Thus,

they picked up the maintenance of the ABB Locos in due

course. The Engineers arrived from Switzerland were

utilizing the persons engaged by the Agent of ABB

company under a contract. All the workers performed their

duty under the guidance of the ABB Company within the

warranty period. It did not come under the purview of the

Control Labour Regulation, as the 24 persons engaged by

the ABB Company were neither recruited nor discontinued

from the services. In the case, the Principal Employer was

the ABB Company, not the Rly.The training of the persons

under the ABB Company was neither scheduled nor

approved by the Railway, so the question of their

educational qualification etc or of a project was

superfluous and unconcerned with the Rly. Authority.

Consequent upon the purchase of 24 ABB Locomotives

from the Company concerned of Switzerland, the Officers

and the Supervisors were trained in Switzerland for their

maintenance, and within the five years period of their

warranty, the existing employees of maintenance in the

Electric Loco Shed, Gomoh, got experience in it, and began

to carry out their maintenance smoothly, following the

termination of the warranty period since thereafter, no

adverse situation arose any time in maintenance of the

ABB locomotives. Since the costly materials are kept

outside, the Identity Card was given by the ABB Company

Representative which was countersigned by the Rly.

Authority to prevent trerpassers. So the Identify Cards

were issued for safety for Railway properties. On any

complain within the warranty period, the Engineers used

to come from Switzerland, and rectified the defeats. The

said persons were under the control of the ABB Company,

the question of assessing their performance was beyond

the Railway Authority, as the Engineers were contarcted.

5.

Further alleged by the O.P./Management that the

alleged termination of these persons engaged by the ABB

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6249

Company followed the expiry of the five years’ warranty

period. The Electric Loco shed, Gomoh, has already the

staff employed in different categories for the maintenance

work. The ABB Company had responsibility for the

maintenance of the said Locos for five years as per the

terms of the agreement under its warranty, for which expert

Engineers engaged from Switzerland were recruited by the

Agent. The payment of salary to the persons, their

attendances and distribution of jobs were done by the

Engineers of the said Company. The EPF was recovered

by the Compay.Thus the Railway Authorities had neither

any part to play nor any involvement anywhere. The

services of these persons were taken by the said Company,

but not by the Railway, for fulfillment of their agreement

for their maintenance job within its warranty period. The

Railway Officers or the Supervisors of the Electric Loco

Shed had nothing in the supervision responsibility of the

Engineers of the Company over the persons engaged by

the Company’s Agent. There is no question of a

camouflage or of any relationship of these persons with

the Railway Authority. The Electric Loco Shed is mainly

for repair and running maintenance of Electric Locomotives

of different classes. The shed has been functioning since

much earlier prior to the arrival of the ABB Locomotives,

smoothly and efficiently carrying out it through the existing

staff of it who are now maintaining the said ABB

Locomotives accordingly. The engagement of these

persons by the said Company for the warranty period of

five years is not a job of prohibiting category. On the

requisition of the Engineers of the said Company for

sending the persons at different places; Chittarajan,

Ghaziabad etc, their identify was only countersigned, but

no journey-pass was issued by the Railway to any of them.

The running maintenance duly certified by the Expert

Engineers was enough to the Railway Authorities, and

accordingly, the said Locos were utilized to work on their

line. These persons had full knowledge of their

engagement at the relevant time for the period of five years

Warranty. There was not any representation by these

persons to the Rly.Auhorities during or after the expiry of

the said warranty. It is well known fact even to the persons

that naturally trained Supervisors/Officers are employed

in the Elect. Loco Shed, Gomoh, mainly for maintenance,

overhauling and periodic inspection of the Elect Locos,

for which maintenance staff are regularly performing their

duties in their maintenance of different categories.

FINDING WITH REASONS

6.

In the instant reference,WWI Gautam Kumar and

WW2 Md.Manir Ahamad,two of the workers on their

affidavited chiefs on their behalf, and MWI Maikal

Lakra,the Sr.Section Engineer, Electric Loco Shed,Gomoh

for the O.P./Management have been examined

respectively.

On careful perusal of the pleadings of both parties,

documents relied and the evidence as adduced on behalf

of the both parties, it prima facie appears the indisputable

fact that the 22 Electric Locos were purchased by the

Railway from the ABB Company Switzerland as per

Warranty period of five years since 1996.

At variance with other facts, the vital issues are

required to be determined for proper adjudication.

Firstly (i) whether there was expressly or impliedly

any employer-employees relationship between both the

parties.

At the point, Mr.Sumren Pal, Learned Advocate for

the workmen has submitted that in view of prima facie

admitted facts- the regularly working of the workmen in

repair of the Locos for beyond five years for the benefits

of the Loco Gomoh of the Railway and their engagement

in the work of perennial nature, the workmen stand entitled

to regularization in their work. In support of it,Mr.Pal has

further argued that in regard to absorption of Contract

Labour by a Public Undertaking on permanent Regular

basis, the employees so appointed on permanent basis

shall be entitled to get from the dates of their absorption

and other benefits as the regular appointed Railway Parcel

Parties already getting as held in the case of A.I.Railway

Parcel & Goods Porters Union Vs. U.O.I. reported in 106

(2003)Delhi Law Times 604 (SC) para 24 to 23.The ruling

relates to ‘Abolition of Contract System of Labour : Report

of Assistant Labour Commissioner can not be taken as

full and complete as to whether petitioner were working

continuously and whether job they perform is perennial

nature; Petitioners in order to succeed have to substantiate

their claim; non-production of evidence in opposition will

not support claim of petitioners.

Further Mr. Pal submits that employer’s obligation

of maintaining a canteen, an establishment of the Principal

Employer availed the service of a contractor, the Hon’ble

Apex Court has been pleased to hold in the case of Mishra

Dhatu Nigam Ltd. Vs. M.Venataiah, reported in 2003 SCC

(L & S) 1066 (DB) that contract Labours would indeed be

the employees of the Principal Employer, and that such

cases do not relate to or depend upon abolition of contract

Labour.

Having relied upon the case of Hussainbhai Vs.The

Alath Factory Tezhilali Union reported in 1978 LAB

I.C.1264 = AIR 1978 SC 1410, Mr. Pal has emphatically

submitted, as held therein, that ‘Where a worker or group

of workers labours to produce goods or services and these

goods or services are for the business of another, that

other is,in fact, the employer. He had economic control

over the workers’substance, skill and continued

employment. If he, for any reason, chokes off, the worker

is virtually laid off. The presence of intermediate

contractors with whom above the workers have immediate

or direct relationship ex-contractors of no consequence

when on lifting the veil or looking at the conspectus of

factors governing employment, lt is found, though draped

on different prefect paper arrangement that the real

employer is the Management, not the immediate contractor

6250

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(Paras 5 to 7). Similarly, referring to the case of Indian

Petrochemicals Corp. Ltd., Vs. Shramik Sena reported in

1999 LAB I.C. 3078 (SC) A, Mr. Pal has to submit in relation

Sections 2(1) and 46 of Factories Act (63 of 1948) as held

therein, that workmen working in the statutory canteen

were even if employed through contractor are employees

of management for purposes of act only.Lastly,the

emphatic plea of Mr.Pal,Learned Counsel for the workmen

is that where a workman is hired in or in connection with

the work of an establishment by the Principal Employer

through a contractor, he acts as an agent so there will be a

master and servant relationship between the Principal

employer and the workman as held in the leading case of

Steel Authority of India Ltd.Vs. V.N.U. Water Front Workers

reported in 2001 LAB I.C. 3656 (SC)(CB) Para 70 at page

3682.Mr. Pal is of view that in lack of proof or production

of any alleged five years’ warranty on behalf of the

Management, the workmen stand entitled to absorption

and regularization in their respective jobs in the terms of

the reference.

Whereas M.M. Khan, the Learned Advocate for the

O.P./Management has vociferously contended that these

24 workmen are not the employees of the Loco Shed,

Gomoh, the E.C.Railway, rather they were engaged by the

Company ABB of Switzerland under warranty for five

years, after the expiry of it, the said company did not

engage them; though they were under their Identity Cards

by the Management, only for their entry into the Loco

Shed,Gomoh for limited years during the five years

warranty; since these 24 workers were never engaged by

the O.P./Management, they neither were nor are the

employees of the Railways so in such situation, no

question of their alleged termination arises, as there was

no employer-employee relationship between the Railway

and the workers.

7.

On perusal of the materials, oral and documentary

of the workmen, and of the O.P./Management, I find the

facts as under:

Only six Identity Cards (all dtt. 25.7 -year ineligible)

of Messrs.Sujay Kumar Dutta,Seva Chand Mahato,Gautam

Kumar,Dhaneshwar Kumar Mahato, Bapi Das, Rajesh Pd,

(Extt.W 1 series), and the photocopy of the I.D. of Mr. Dev

Narayan Paswan (Marked X for identification) clearly

corroborate their status not as the employees of the

Railway, rather they were candidates for the post of

Bombardier Transportation (Ltd.) against RRS/GMO on

terms of “For self Identification valid up to June,2003,and

on sponsorship of the aforesaid Transport Ltd. the

I.D,.Cards appear to be issued under the signatures of

Sr.Section Engineer Rasid Khan.

Six Spl. Day Permits dtt.7.12.1999, 6.12.1999,

24.10.2003, 5.02.2002, 20.11.1999 & 23.10.2003 (Extt. W.2

series) issued by Shri Bose, C.E.E., Chitranjan Loco Motive

to Messers, D.Mahato, S.Dutta, S.Ram, P.Sengupta, Sunjuy

Dutta,S.Dutta.B.Das & S.Ram of M/s. AD TRANZ, BTIL

& Bombardier concerned respectively for one and two

days respectively for entry only.

Three Certifying letters dtt. 25.1.2002, 1.3.2002 &

14.02.2002 (Extt.3 series) issued by S.E.E. C.L.W.Chitranjan

to Messrs Sujay Dutta, Sujay Kr. Dutta and Mr. Bapi Das

as the employees of aforesaid M/s. Bombardier

Transportation India Ltd., Gomoh, for carrying a few

specified tools of Railway to Machinocraft, Post: Makesh,

Distt : Hooghly, Kolkata and M/s. Chittarangan,

Locomotives Works, Chittarangaj respectively. These

Certificates prove the status of aforesaid three workers

only as carrier workers of said Bombarier Transportation

India Ltd.

The Seven Bank Account Pass Books of Sujay Kr.

Dutta twice, Daneshwar Kr. Mahato, thrice, Md. Manir

Ahmad, Rajesh Kumar and Seva Chand Mahato

respectively are their own Pass Books of Allahabad Bank,

Gomoh, marked as Extt.4 series with objection.

The Provident Fund Slips of only two workers Seva

Chandra Mahato and Sujay Jr.Dutta issued by the

P.F.Commissioner, Haryana- Extt.W5 and 6 series

respectively, prove their EPF deductions were done by

their M/s. Prakash Contractors who had issued the

Experience Certificates all dtt.31.10.2002 to only five

workers Dhaneshwar Kr. Mahato, Rajesh Pd, Dev Narayan

Paswan,Seva Chand Mahato and Bapi Das under IR GP-

GP-140 Locomotive Project (Extt. W.7 Series).It is an

acknowledged fact that any Project is not of perennial,

but for time limit just the warranty period in connection

with the purchase of the 22 Electric Locos by the Rly./

Board concerned in the case.

All the aforesaid documents of the workmen

incontroversially set up that they were out and out outside

workers for their M/s. Bombardier or M/s. Prakash

Contractors.But they have though not any such pleading,

yet produced their aforesaid unpleaded evidences which

stand quite inadmissible in the eye of Law.Hence,it stands

evident that there was never any relationship of employer-

employee between both the paties.In such situations the

argument of Mr.Pal appears to be based on false

reasonings, as none of the said rulings holds good with

the facts of the case under adjudication.

(ii)

Whether these workers are entitled to any relief of

employment or regularization.

It stands essential to respond that where no

employer-employee relationship existed between both the

parties for a moment, there can never be any engagement

of the workers by the management as meant by them in

the schedule to the reference. Likewise in lack of their any

engagement, there can never be any termination of any of

the workers by the Railway.

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6251

In result, it is, in the terms of the reference, hereby

awarded that in view of the aforesaid findings, there was

neither engagement of the 24 workers by the Management

for maintenance of Locos in Electric Loco Shed, Gomoh,

Eastern Central Railway, through any contractor for five

years nor their any termination nor there was any occasion

for the management to deny their employment, because

the tricky schedule to the reference itself is quite illegal

and unjustified.Therefore,no Management can provide

any relief to them, as their allegations to that effect are

totally conceived and baseless.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

List of the workmen

Sl. No.

Name

1.

Gautam Kumar

2.

Suman Banik

3.

S.M.Saquib

4.

Puran Singh Satwal

5.

Sujay Kumar Dutta

6.

Bapi Das

7.

Sujeet Kumar Yadav

8.

Dhaneswar Kr,.Mahato

9.

Imtiyaz Ahamed

10.

Rajesh Kumar Mahato

11.

Deepak Sarkar

12.

Rajesh Prasad

13.

Seva Chand Mahato

14.

Dev Narayan Paswan

15.

Binod Kumar Pandey

16.

A.H.A. Ansari

17.

Biman Kumar Bhowmick

18.

Sudama Ram

19.

Manoj Kumar

20.

Md.Manir Ahmed

21.

Sauman Kr.Moullik

22.

Rakesh Ram

23.

Sanjay Kumar

24.

Madan Kumar Ram

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2465-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh; LVsV

cSad ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k psUubZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 25@2013) dks izdkf'kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&12012@108@2012&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2465.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 25/2013) of

the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai

as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute

between the management of M/s. Lakshmi Vilas Bank

Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central

Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-12012/08/2012-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT

CHENNAI

Wednesday, the 20th August, 2014

Present : K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 25/2013

(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause

(d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10

of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), between

the Management of Lakshmi Vilas Bank and their workman)

BETWEEN

Sri J. Vijayasekhar

: 1st Party/Petitioner

AND

M/s. Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd. : 2nd Party/Respondent

Administrative Office

Karur-639006

Appearance:

For the 1st Party/Petitioner

: M/s. J. Muthukumaran,

Advocate

For the 2nd Party/Respondent : M/s. T.S. Gopalan & Co.,

Advocates

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour &

Employment vide its Order No. L-12012/108/2012-IR(B-I)

dated 21.02.2013 referred the following Industrial Dispute

to this Tribunal for adjudication.

The schedule mentioned in that order is :

“Whether the action of the management of Lakshmi

Vilas Bank Ltd. imposing termination of service on

Sri J. Vijayasekhar is justified or not? If not to what

relief the workman is entitled to?”

2.

On receipt of the Industrial Dispute this Tribunal

has numbered it as ID 25/2013 and issued notices to both

sides. Both sides have entered appearance through their

counsel and filed their claim and counter statement

respectively.

6252

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

3.

The averments in the Claim Statement filed by the

petitioner in brief are these:

The petitioner was appointed as Sub-Staff in

Respondent Bank on 25.02.1991. In 2005 the petitioner

was promoted as Clerk. While the petitioner was serving

at Rajahmundry Branch, the Respondent issued a Charge

Memo to him alleging that the provisional certificate and

mark-list submitted by the petitioner are fake and this was

done with the intension to cheat the bank and thereby the

petitioner had committed gross-misconduct under Clause-

5M of the Bipartite Settlement. The petitioner has

submitted explanation to the Charge Memo. The

Respondent ordered enquiry and appointed Enquiry

Officer. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report that the

charge against the petitioner is proved. After hearing the

petitioner, the respondent imposed the punishment of

discharge from service with superannuation benefits on

the petitioner. The charge framed against the petitioner is

baseless. The Respondent has not proved that the

certificate and the mark-list submitted by the petitioner

are bogus. An award may be passed holding that the action

of the management in terminating the service of the

petitioner is unjustified and also directing the Respondent

to reinstate the petitioner with full back wages, continuity

of service and other attendant benefits.

4.

The Respondent has filed Counter Statement

contending as follows:

In the year 2002, on the basis of representation of

Sub-Staff who have acquired the degree of graduation,

the Respondent Bank had introduced two channels of

promotion from Sub-Staff to Clerk, one general channel of

seniority-cum-merit and the other graduates automatic

eligibility for promotion. Sometime in the year 2002, the

bank received information that some of the Sub-Staff who

were promoted as Clerks had produced false degree

certificates. On seeking confirmation from the concerned

universities it came to light that in a few cases Sub-Staff

had secured promotion by producing false degree

certificates. The petitioner was one such candidate who

had produced false certificate for getting promotion from

Sub-Staff to Clerical Staff. The petitioner had reported on

17.09.2005 that he had completed BA Degree Examination

from Andhra University and had produced provisional

certificate alongwith statement of marks for having

undergone the Graduation course and obtained the Degree

Certificate. On verification with the School of Distance

Education, Andhra University, the Assistant Registrar sent

reply stating that Provisional Certificate and Mark-lists

produced by the petitioner are fake. On the basis of this

charge sheet was issued to the petitioner charging him

with the misconduct of production of false certificate for

getting promotion. As the explanation given by the

petitioner was not convincing, an enquiry was conducted

and the Enquiry Officer had submitted report holding that

charge against the petitioner was proved. After personal

hearing of the petitioner, the Disciplinary Authority

awarded the punishment. The petitioner has committed

very serious misconduct by which he has forfeited the

confidence of the bank. The punishment awarded to the

petitioner cannot be said to be harsh. The petitioner is not

entitled to any relief.

5.

The evidence in the case consists of oral evidence

of WW1 and MW1 and documents marked as Ext. W1 to

Ext. W16 on the petitioner’s side and Ext.M1 to Ext. M32

on the Respondent’s side.

6.

The points for consideration are:

(i)

Whether the action of the management in imposing

the punishment of termination from service on the

petitioner is legal and justified?

(ii)

What is the relief, if any, to which the petitioner is

entitled?

The Points

7.

The petitioner had allegedly produced bogus

provisional degree certificate and mark-list for obtaining

promotion from the post of Sub-Staff to that of Clerk at the

Respondent Bank. As per the Bipartite Settlement, Sub-

Staff who had acquired Degree were entitled to automatic

promotion as Clerk. The petitioner is said to have submitted

provisional certificate and mark-list to the Respondent on

the basis of which he was given promotion. In view of

certain anonymous letters received at the Bank informing

that some of the Sub-Staff who were promoted had

produced bogus certificates, the Bank had written to the

concerned Universities including the University of Andhra

Pradesh from where the petitioner had allegedly obtained

the Degree. The Assistant Registrar of the University is

said to have written to the Respondent informing that the

Provisional Certificate and the Certificates produced by

the petitioner are fake. It was on the basis of this

departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner

in which he was found guilty and was removed from service

with superannuation benefits.

8.

Except for the contention that the Respondent did

not prove the charges against the petitioner as per law,

there is no case for the petitioner that the domestic enquiry

conducted by the Respondent is not in a fair and proper

manner. In spite of this, the petitioner has adduced

evidence before this Court to prove certain documents.

One witness has been examined on the side of the

Respondent also.

9.

In the domestic enquiry, the Management has

examined three witnesses. The provisional certificates and

three mark-lists submitted by the petitioner to the Bank

were marked in the enquiry proceedings. The witnesses

examined are all bank officials. The witnesses examined

before this Tribunal by the Respondent also is an official

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6253

of the bank, the one who was working as Branch Manager

at Rajahmundry where the petitioner had worked. He has

stated that all the correspondence between the petitioner

and the Bank were done through him. This witness is a

witness to the enquiry proceedings also.

10.

The Enquiry Officer had relied upon the letter said

to have been written by the University informing that the

provisional certificate and the mark-lists sent to it as issued

to the petitioner are bogus. The argument that has been

advanced on behalf of the Counsel for the Petitioner is

that the Management having advanced the case that the

documents produced by the petitioner are bogus, it was

for the Management to prove that the certificate and the

mark-list are bogus. According to the counsel in the

absence of evidence of concerned persons from the

University there is no proof available to show that the

documents are bogus. Thus according to him, the Enquiry

Officer has entered a finding against the petitioner in the

absence of any evidence.

11.

The counsel for the Respondent has referred to the

documents produced and the various communications

from the University to show that actually the petitioner

had not obtained a Degree from the University but he had

produced bogus documents to obtain promotion. Ex.M3

is the Provisional Certificate and Ext.M4 to Ext.M6 are the

mark lists produced by the petitioner before the

Respondent. Ext.M7 is the letter written by the Bank to

the Controller of Examinations of Andhra University

requesting to confirm having issued the Ext.M3 Certificate

and Ext.M4 to Ext.M6, the mark-lists. Ex.M14 is the reply

submitted by the Assistant Registrar of School of Distance

Education, Andhra Pradesh informing that the provisional

certificate and the mark-lists issued to the petitioner were

verified and were found not genuine and fake. There is

another such letter from Assistant Registrar for

Examinations and marked as Ext.M15 also. It seems the

Respondent has made efforts to get the Officers of the

University who sent Ext.M14 and Ext.M15 but they were

not available and were not examined in the enquiry

proceedings.

12.

It was on the basis of non-examination of above

witnesses it has been contended by the counsel for the

petitioner that there is no proof available to show that the

documents are not genuine. According to him, on the basis

of letters said to have been written by the authorities of

the University, without examining them, the Enquiry

Officer should not have entered a finding that the

documents are not genuine.

13.

The Counsel for the Respondent has referred to the

explanation submitted by the petitioner and marked as

Ext.W3. In this explanation the petitioner has taken a stand

that he has taken coaching and guidance from a local

educational institute and has appeared for BA Degree

examination. According to him, the Administrator of the

local institute had managed to procure fake certificates

and had given them to him. Believing them on the face

and also due to the fact that he has appeared for BA

Examinations, he has forwarded the certificates to the

Respondent. He has requested the Respondent not to act

on the certificates and to pardon him. He has further stated

that he is withdrawing his letter dated 17.09.2005 (Ext.M2)

seeking promotion along with its enclosures.

14.

No doubt the Respondent should have examined

the concerned authorities of School of Distance Education,

University of Andhra Pradesh to prove that the documents

submitted by the petitioner are fake. However, the very

admission made by the petitioner in Ext.W3 would show

that the documents are fake. He had stated in his

explanation that the Administrator “appeared to have

managed to procured fake certificates”. From the wording

in the explanation it is very clear that the petitioner has

accepted the fact that the documents are fake. It is for this

reason, he has requested to withdraw his letter seeking

promotion along with its enclosures i.e. the certificate and

the mark-lists.

15.

Ex.W8 is the appeal submitted to the Appellate

Authority. In this also the petitioner has stated that he

has received the provisional certificates and mark sheet

through courier and the cover appeared to have been

posted at Visakhapatnam which is the Headquarters of

the University and he had no knowledge that they are not

genuine. He has further stated that only from the Charge

Sheet issued to him he came to know of the fact. He has

further stated that he had enquired with the Administrator

of the Tutorial College where he took the coaching and

came to know that the Administrator had stage managed

the fake certificates and withheld his original mark sheets

where he had failed in two subjects. He had also stated

that when he came to know about the truth of the certificate

he withdrew his letter seeking promotion and sought

unconditional apology from the Bank. Thus there is the

admission by the petitioner during the enquiry

proceedings and during the proceedings in appeal that

the certificates and the mark list are fake, though he had

contended that at the time when he presented them to the

Respondent he had no knowledge that they are fake. In

the wake of these admissions on behalf of the petitioner I

do not think the failure of the Respondent to examine the

authorities concerned to prove the genuineness or not of

the documents are of any consequence. The very

admission of the petitioner would show that the

documents are fake.

16.

An employee working as Sub-Staff is entitled to

automatic promotion as per the Bipartite Settlement only

if he has obtained a degree. The petitioner having failed to

acquire the necessary qualification, he cannot work in the

Clerical Cadre with the Respondent.

6254

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

17.

The petitioner was discharged from service with

superannuation benefits for the misconduct of producing

false certificates for obtaining promotion. The argument

that is advanced on behalf of the petitioner is that he has

not submitted the certificate and the mark-list before the

Respondent with the knowledge that they are fake.

According to the petitioner, he never knew before he

received the Charge Memo that the documents are fake.

Even in the explanation submitted by him to the Charge

Memo he has stated that he has taken private coaching,

that the documents were sent to him through courier from

Visakhapatnam and he had no reason to doubt that they

are fake certificates. He had stated in his appeal memo

submitted to Appellate Authority that on enquiry he had

come to know that a criminal proceedings has been initiated

against the Administrator of the coaching centre where he

had attended.

18.

The counsel for the petitioner had referred to certain

legal pronouncements in support of his argument that in

the absence of proof of tampering with the document the

person need not be visited with the punishment of

discharge from service. The counsel has referred to the

decision in NAVDEEP VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND

ANOTHER reported in 2006 9 SCC 500 where it was held

that even though there was tampering, the tampering itself

was not of any consequence. It was observed that even

without considering the tampered marks the appellant

possessed minimum educational qualification. The Apex

Court had directed that the government could well to

consider whether a fresh appointment could be given

ignoring the tampered marks. Of course, it was specified

by the Apex Court that this is not to be taken as a precedent.

In the decision in SEKAR VS. DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL

EDUCATION AND OTHERS reported in 2009 4 CTC 158 it

was held that the alleged bogus certificate has no bearing

in the case and had directed to reinstate the petitioner in

service. In the decision in GUNASEKARAN VS.

DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND ANOTHER

reported in Writ Petition No. 14217 of 2007 (unreported)

the Madras High Court has found that the certificate is

bogus. At the same time it was also found that the petitioner

had no knowledge that the certificate itself is a bogus one.

It was held that in the absence of knowledge on the part of

the person who produced the certificate that the same

was fake he cannot be penalized with the punishment of

dismissal. The counsel for the Respondent has referred to

the decision in KERALA SOLVENT EXTRACTIONS LTD.

VS. UNNIKRISHNAN AND ANOTHER reported in 1994

2 LLJ 888 where a workman had suppressed his higher

qualification since the qualification for the post was only

8th Standard and the Apex Court has upheld the

termination of the person on the basis. However, it is not

a case where the concerned person has acted without

knowledge.

19.

Certain circumstances in the present case persuade

me to hold that there is every possibility of the petitioner

having acted without actual knowledge of the fakeness of

the certificate. Immediately after the charge memo was

issued to him he has given an explanation stating that he

did not consciously, knowingly and intentionally produced

any fake certificates before the Respondent. He has stated

that he had received the documents by post and he was

under the impression that they are genuine and thus have

produced them before the Respondent seeking promotion

on that basis. In the same explanation he has stated that

he has taken coaching from a private coaching centre and

he had no knowledge that the documents were fake. The

possibility of a coaching centre creating the certificates to

boost its image certainly could not be ruled out. Another

aspect which persuades me to think that the petitioner

had no part in the affair is that he had always taken a

consistent stand that he was not aware of the manipulation

and he was just made a scapegoat.

20.

The petitioner seems to have been working with the

Respondent for some time. There is no case for the

Respondent that the petitioner had committed any

misconduct earlier. He, just like any person working as a

Class-IV employee, had the dream of getting into the next

higher step in the ladder, had attended the coaching class

and had appeared for all the examinations. When he

received the certificates in his hand, in all probability he

might have thought that he had passed the examination

and the certificate and the mark-list are proof of this. I am

inclined to come to the conclusion that the petitioner in all

probability had no knowledge that the documents are fake.

In fact in the absence of any evidence on the part of the

management there is nothing to show that the petitioner

had submitted the documents intentionally, with the

knowledge that they are fake, in order to gain advantage

using the same. In that case there is no impropriety in

allowing the petitioner to continue as Sub-Staff with the

Respondent.

21.

On the basis of my discussion above, an award is

passed as follows:

The order of the Disciplinary Authority which was

confirmed by the Appellate Authority is modified. The

punishment of discharge from service is set aside. The

Respondent is directed to take back the petitioner in service

as Sub-Staff within two months and retain him in service

in the same position. The petitioner will not be entitled to

any back wages. The period during which he was out of

service shall be taken into account for the purpose of

continuity of service only.

K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6255

Witnesses Examined :

For the 1st Party/

: WW1, Sri J. Vijayasekhar

Petitioner

For the 2nd Party/ : MW1, Sri Chinta Bala Nageswara Rao

Management

Documents Marked :

On the petitioner’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

Ex.W1

16.02.1991

Appointment Order

Ex.W2

13.04.2006

Charge Sheet

Ex.W3

25.05.2006

Explanation

Ex.W4

12.08.2006

Enquiry Officer Appointment

Ex.W5

12.01.2008

Findings of Enquiry Officer

Ex.W6

02.02.2008

Proceedings of the Disciplinary

Authority

Ex.W7

14.02.2008

Personal hearing of Disciplinary

Authority

Ex.W8

20.02.2008

Appeal submitted by the

petitioner

Ex.W9

07.07.2008

Personal hearing

Ex.W10

26.07.2008

Minutes of personal hearing

Ex.W11

01.08.2008

Punishment confirmed by the

Authority

Ex.W12

-

Annexure

Ex.W13

02.05.2006

Mark Statement

Ex.W14

-

Hall Ticket

Ex.W15

-

Student Identification Card

Ex.W16

-

Hall Ticket

On the Management’s side

Ex. No.

Date

Description

Ex.M1

11.09.2006

05.12.2006

Proceedings of Enquiry

22.01.2007

30.04.2007

Ex.M2

17.09.2005

Letter from petitioner to

Respondent

Ex.M3

30.07.2005

Provisional Certificate issued to

Vijayasekhar Jonnada by Andhra

University – April, 2005

Ex.M4

30.06.2005

Statement of marks issued by

Andhra University to Vijayasekhar

Jonnada – April, 2005

Ex.M5

14.07.2005

Statement of marks issued by

Andhra University to Vijayasekhar

Jonnada – April, 2005

Ex.M6

30.07.2005

Statement of marks issued by

Andhra University to Vijayasekhar

Jonnada – April, 2005

Ex.M7

27.10.2005

Letter from Respondent to

Controller of Examinations,

Andhra University under Ref.

HRD/PAY/9/24/2005-2006

Ex.M8

31.12.2005

Letter

from

Respondent,

Rajahmundry Branch to A.O.,

Karur

Ex.M9

06.03.2006

Letter from Respondent to

Petitioner

Ex.M10

09.03.2006

Reply from petitioner to the

Respondent through Branch

Manager, Rajahkundry Branch

Ex.M11

03.02.2006

Letter from Respondent to the

Controller of Examination, Andhra

University under reference HRD/

SS/268/2005-2006

Ex.M12

08.02.2006

Letter from Andhra University,

Visakhapatnam to Respondent

Ex.M13

15.02.2006

Letter from Respondent to The

Controller of Examination, Andhra

Pradesh, Visakhapatnam

Ex.M14

/2/2006

Letter from Andhra University

received

School of Distance Education,

on

Visakhapatnam to Respondent

03.02.2006

(No. SDE/Exams – II/ 2006)

Ex.M15

06.05.2006

Letter from Andhra University

School of Distance Education,

Visakhapatnam addressed to

Respondent

Ex.M16

09.02.2007

Letter from Respondent to

Lakshmi

Vilas

Bank,

Visakhapatnam

Ex.M17

26.02.2007

Letter from Lakshmi Vilas Bank,

Visakhapatnam to Respondent

Ex.M18

26.02.2007

Letter from Andhra University

School of Distance Education to

Respondent - (No. SDE/Exams –

II/2006)

Ex.M19

29.06.2007

Presenting Officer’s submissions

Ex.M20

24.09.2007

Defense submissions

Ex.M21

14.02.2008

2nd Show-Cause Notice issued

by Respondent to the Petitioner

proposing

punishment

of

“Discharge from service with

superannuation benefits” and

notifying personal hearing on

28.02.2008

6256

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Ex.M22

14.03.2008

Proceedings of personal hearing

before the Disciplinary Authority

Ex.M23

09.05.2008

Final order discharging the

petitioner from the service of the

Bank with superannuation

benefits

Ex.M24

01.08.2008

Order of the Appellate Authority

confirming the punishment

imposed by the Disciplinary

Authority

Ex.M25

28.11.2011

Dispute raised by Petitioner under

Section-2A of the ID Act before

ALC(C), Chennai

Ex.M26

21.04.2012

Respondent’s counter filed before

the ALC (C), Chennai

Ex.M27

25.10.2012

Conciliation Failure Report

Ex.M28

20.01.2009

Receipt of the petitioner towards

settlement of his gratuity dues –

Rs. 1,13,965.05 credited to his SB

A/c No. 605-301-13349

Ex.M29

20.01.2009

Receipt of the petitioner towards

settlement of his GSIL payment

and credited to his SB A/c No. 605-

301-13349

Ex.M30

15.11.2010

Receipt of the petitioner towards

full and final settlement of his

gratuity arrears – Rs. 26,376.26

credited to his SB A/c No. 605-

301-13349

Ex.M31

20.01.2009

Receipt of the petitioner towards

full and final settlement of his

provident fund dues and credited

to his SB A/c No. 605-301-13349

Ex.M32

26/27.09.2002Settlement

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2466-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj LVsV cSad vkWiQ

chdkusj ,.M t;iqj ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds

deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;

ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ

la[;k 15@2011) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks

8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&12011@01@2011&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2466.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 15/2011)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour

Court, Jaipur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial

dispute between the management of State Bank of Bikner

& Jaipur and their workmen, received by the Central

Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-12011/01/2011-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR

Sh. BHARAT PANDEY, Presiding Officer

I.D.15/2011

Reference No. L-12011/01/2011 (IR(B-I) dated: 2.6.2011

General Secretary

All Bank Safai Karamchari Sangh

Sita Bari, Kamani Road,

Harijan Basti, Jhotwara,

Jaipur

V/s.

General Manager (Operations)

State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur

Head Office, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme,

Jaipur

Present

For the applicant Union: Sh. Dindayal Dhehanwal

For the non-applicant

: Sh. R.K.Jain &

Sh. A. Mazoomdar, Advocate

AWARD

30.10.2013

1.

The Central Government in exercise of the powers

conferred under clause (d) of sub-section 1 & 2(A) of

Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 has referred

the following Industrial dispute to this tribunal for

adjudication:-

“Whether the action of the management of State

Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur in terminating the services

of Shri Sonu, Part Time Sweeper, SBBJ, Surajpole

Branch, Jaipur with effect from 17.2.2010 is legal &

justified? To what relief the workman is entitled?”

2.

After receipt of reference it was registered on

12.2.2011 & notices were sent to both the parties. On

19.9.2011 statement of claim dated 19.9.2011 was filed on

behalf of applicant through General Secretary, All Bank

Safai Karamchari Sangh (Regd.) Sh. Dindayal Dhehanwal.

On behalf of non-applicant, General Manager (Operation),

State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur, Head Office, Jaipur

Sh. Amitabh Mazoomdar, Advocate was in appearance &

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6257

reply against the claim was filed on 11.9.2012. Opportunity

was given to applicant for filing rejoinder & concerned

documents. On 24.1.2013 documents were filed by non-

applicant alongwith index. Opportunity was given to

applicant for filing rejoinder & documents on 15.7.2013

but neither rejoinder nor documents were filed on that

date.

3.

An application alongwith memorandum of settlement

was jointly filed by both the parties with request to keep

the memorandum of settlement on record of the file &

pass the award according to memorandum of settlement

filed by the parties.

4.

According to memorandum of settlement, it has been

agreed by & between the parties that applicant Sh. Sonu

represented through General Secretary of the All Bank

Safai Karamchari Sangh will be absorbed by the bank as

part time safai karamchari (PTSK) w.e.f. 1.8.2013 & there

will be no claim from his side for any kind of benefit accruing

before 1.8.2013 against the bank & all dispute between the

parties shall be deemed to have been resolved. It has also

been resolved between the parties that Sh. Sonu will be

posted in any branch of the bank existing in Jaipur & his

appointment by the bank shall not be considered as an

example for extending this kind of benefit in any other

case. It has also been resolved that dispute between the

parties before industrial tribunal Cum Labour Court, Jaipur

which has been registered as CGIT-15/2011 shall came to

an end & an application will be jointly filed before the

tribunal to pass the award in terms of memorandum of

settlement.

5.

Due to retirement of the Presiding Officer of this

tribunal, this memorandum of settlement remained

undisposed.

6.

After assuming the charge by the succeeding

Presiding Officer on 10.10.2013, another application in

connection with memorandum of settlement was filed by

parties on 25.10.2013 in which it has been alleged that in

memorandum of settlement dated 15.7.2013 in 1st paragraph

1.8.2013 be read as on or before 31.10.2013 which is the

date of taking Sh. Sonu in employment of the bank as part

time safai karamchari. It has also been requested that this

application be made part of the memorandum of settlement.

7.

The dispute between the parties referred for

adjudication pertains to whether termination of the services

of Sh. Sonu, a part time sweeper at State Bank of Bikaner

& Jaipur, Surajpole Branch, Jaipur w.e.f. 17.2.2010 by the

management of SBBJ is legal & justified.

8.

The Ld. Representatives appearing on behalf of

both the parties have jointly submitted that dispute raised

by the applicant union for Sh. Sonu has been amicably

resolved & a settlement has been entered into by both the

parties on 15.7.2013 & 25.10.2013, therefore, award may be

passed in terms of memorandum of settlement. In view of

above facts & circumstances, memorandum of settlement

may be accepted by the tribunal & dispute between the

parties may be disposed in terms of settlement entered

into by them.

9.

In view of above fact & circumstances, I find it fit &

proper to dispose this CGIT case no.15/2011 in terms of

memorandum of settlement which appears to be legal &

voluntarily entered by both the parties.

10.

In view of above, the award is passed in terms of

memorandum of settlement dated 15.7.2013 & 25.10.2013,

Annexure-A & Annexure-B respectively. Both the annexure

will be part of the award.

11.

Award as above.

12.

Let a copy of the award be sent to Central

Government for publication u/s 17(1) of the I.D.Act.

BHARAT PANDEY, Presiding Officer

Annex-A

le{k ekuuh; dsUæh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kfèkdj.k] t;iqj

okn la[;k % lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- 15@2011

eè;

egklfpo]

vkWy cSad liQkbZ deZpkjh la?k

t;iqj

,oa

'kk[kk izcaèkd]

,l-ch-ch-ts-]

lqjtiksy 'kk[kk] t;iqj A

izkFkhZ o vçkFkhZ dh vksj ls la;qDr izkFkZuk&i=k

ekU;oj]

mijksDr izdj.k esa nksuksa i{k la;qDr :i ls fuEu fuosnu

djrs gSa %µ

1-

;g fd mijksDr izdj.k okLrs tokcmy tokc] izkFkhZ fnukad

25&4&2013 dks fu;r Fkh A

2-

;g fd mijksDr izdj.k esa nksuksa i{k ds eè; ijLij okrkZvksa

ds i'pkr~ ,d vkilh czkgeh le>kSrk lEiUu gqvk gS]

ftldh ,d izfr bl izkFkZuk&i=k ds lkFk layXu dh tk jgh

gS A

vr% ekuuh; U;k;fèkdj.k ls lfou; fuosnu gS fd mDr

izdj.k esa le>kSrk ifji=k dks fjdkMZ ij fy;k tkdj] mDr

le>kSrs ds vuq:i vkokMZ ikfjr djus dh Ñik iQjekosa A

okLrs vizkFkhZ

okLrs izkFkhZ

jktsUnz oqQekj oekZ

nhun;ky <+sguoky

'kk[kk izcUèkd]

egklfpo

,l-ch-ch-ts- lwjtiksy 'kk[kk

vky cSad liQkbZ deZpkjh la?k

t;iqj

jktLFkku] t;iqj

fnukad % 15&7&2013

6258

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

le>kSrs dk çk:i

(iQkeZ&,p)

i{kdkjksa ds uke

% eS- LVsV cSad vkWiQ chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

ekiZQr egk izcaèkd ,oa egk lfpo vkWy

cSad liQkbZ deZpkjh la?k] t;iqj A

izcUèk izfrfufèk

% 1- Jh jktsUnz oqQekj oekZ] 'kk[kk izcUèkd]

,l-ch-ch-ts- lwjt iky 'kk[kk] t;iqj A

deZpkjh la?k izfrfufèk% nhun;ky <s+guoky (egklfpo)

vky cSad liQkbZ deZpkjh la?k jktLFkku A

le>kSrs dk laf{kIr fooj.k

vkWy cSad liQkbZ deZpkjh la?k }kjk Jh lksew ds lEcèk esa

,d dfFkr vkS|ksfxd fookn dsUnzh; mi Je vk;qDr] t;iqj ds

le{k mBk;k x;k Fkk ,oa ftlds vliQy gksus ij dsUnzh; ljdkj

}kjk mDr dfFkr fookn dks U;k;fu.kkZFkZ dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kfèkdj.k

,oa Je U;k;ky;] t;iqj dks izsf"kr dj fn;k x;k gS] tks orZeku esa

izdj.k la[;k lhthvkbZVh 15@2011 ij yfEcr gSA mDr okn ds

yfEcr jgrs gq, i{kdkjksa }kjk vkilh okrkZ ds tfj;s fookn dks

lekIr djus dh igy dh xbZ ,oa ijLij okrkZvksa ds i'pkr~

i{kdkjksa ds eè; fuEu 'krks± ij le>kSrk lEiUu fd;k x;k %µ

le>kSrs dh 'krs± %

1-

;g fd nksuksa i{kksa ds eè; ;g r; ik;k x;k fd lksuw

pkofj;k ftldk izfrfufèkRo mDr la?k }kjk fd;k x;k gS dks

fnukad 01&08&13 ls va'k dkyhu liQkbZ deZpkjh (PTSK)ds

in ij cSad }kjk dk;Z ij j[kk tk;sxk A i{kdkjksa ds eè; ;g

Hkh r; ik;k x;k fd mDr frfFk ls fu;qfDr nsus ds mijkar Jh

lksuw pkaofj;k vFkok mDr deZpkjh la?k }kjk fdlh Hkh izdkj

ds iwoZ vofèk ds ykHk@ifjykHk] osru cdk;k vFkok vU;]

;k ofj"Brk vkfn ds ckjs esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dk dksbZ Dyse

cSad ds fo:¼ 'ks"k ugha jg tk;sxk rFkk lHkh izdkj ds

fookn dks bl le>kSrs ds ifjis{k esa lekIr le>k tk;sxk A

2-

;g fd nksuksa i{kksa ds eè; ;g Hkh r; ik;k x;k fd cSad }kjk

t;iqj esa dgha Hkh fdlh Hkh 'kk[kk esa] Jh lksuw pkoafj;k dks

fu;qDr djus dk vfèkdkj jgsxk ,oa ftlds lEcaèk esa Jh

lksuw pkoafj;k vFkok deZpkjh la?k dks fdlh Hkh izdkj dh

dksbZ vkifÙk ugha gksxh rFkk u gh muds }kjk mDr lEcaèk esa

dksbZ fojksèk fd;k tk;sxk A

3-

;g fd nksuksa i{kksa ds eè; ;g Hkh r; ik;k x;k fd Jh lksuw

pkaofj;k dks mijksDrkuqlkj fu;qfDr nsus dks fdlh Hkh izdkj

ls ckè;dkjh felky@ifjikVh ugha ekuk tkosxk rFkk orZeku

izdj.k ds vykok la?k }kjk vU; fdlh ekeys esa mDr

lan£Hkr fu;qfDr ds fy, dksbZ ncko ugha cuk;k tkosxk A

4-

;g fd nksuksa i{kksa ds eè; ;g Hkh r; ik;k x;k fd bl

le>kSrs ds iQyLo:i deZpkjh la?k }kjk tks vkS|ksfxd

fookn ekuuh; dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;fèkdj.k ,oa Je

U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds le{k izLrqr fd;k gS] tks fd ekuuh;

U;k;ky; }kjk izdj.k la[;k lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- 15@2011 ij

iathÑr fd;k x;k] dks iw.kZ :i ls lekIr le>k tkosxk

rFkk i{kdkjksa }kjk la;qDr :i ls ekuuh; U;k;ky; ds le{k

,d la;qDr izkFkZuk i=k izLrqr dj fuosnu fd;k tkosxk fd

ekuuh; U;k;ky; mDr fookn dks lekIr dj i{kdkjksa ds

eè; gq;s orZeku le>kSrs ds vuq:i] vokMZ ikfjr djus dh

Ñik djsa A

mijksDr 'krks± ,oa 'kjk;rksa ds lkFk nksuksa i{kksa ds eè;

vkt 15&07&2013 dks lkSgknz iw.kZ okrkoj.k esa mijksDr

izdkj ls le>kSrk fu"ikfnr gqvk gS] lun jgs ,oa oDr

t:jr dke vkos A

gLrk{kj deZpkjh

gLrk{kj izcUèk

izfrfufèk

izfrfufèk

nhn;ky <+sguoky

jktsUnz oqQekj oekZ

vk-cS-l-d-la?k]

,l-ch-ch-ts- lwjt iky 'kk[kk

jktLFkku] t;iqj

t;iqj

lk{kh %

1- Arvind Mathur Staff SBBJ Surajpole Br. Jaipur

1- 'kadj iq=k daqt fcgkjh] 266]

';keiqjh] ghnk dh eksjh] t;iqj

ANNEX-B

Before : The Hon"ble Presiding Officer CGIT-Cum-

Labour Court, Jaipur

Case No. CGIT 15/11

Sonu (Workman) Rep. by

All Banks Safai Karmchari Sangh (Regd.)

Vs.

Management of State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur

Application for issuance of Award in terms of Settlement

arrived between both the Parties.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR

Both the parties as mentioned above have arrived at

a settlement to resolve the above dispute as per terms and

conditions contained in the memo of settlement dt.

15-7-2013 submitted jointly before the Hon. Tribunal.

However, the date stipulated in the above settlement

dt. 15-7-2013 was 1st August, 2013 for providing

appointment to the workman. We humbly request to your

honour to kindly read the said date as on or before 31st

October, 2013 instead of 1st August, 2013 and this

document be made Humbly sub by part of agreement.

25th October, 2013

Rajinder Kumar Verma

Branch Manager

Din Dayal Dhanwal Genl. Secy. Union

All Bank Safai Karmachari Sangh

(SONU) Workman

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6259

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2467-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj mÙkj iwoZ jsyos

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] y[kumQ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 05@2002)

dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&41011@40@2001&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2467.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 05/2002)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,

Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial

dispute between the management of North Eastern Rialway

and their workmen, received by the Central Government

on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-41011/40/2001-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL–CUM-LABOUR COURT LUCKNOW

PRESENT : Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer

I.D. No. 05/2002

Ref. No. L-41011/40/2001-IR (B-I) dated : 08.01.2002

BETWEEN

The Branch Secretary

N.E. Railway Employees Union, P.R.K.S.

Gorakhpur, C/o Shakha Mantri

Distt. Gorakhpur - 273001

(Espousing cause of Mo. Sagir & 11 others)

AND

The General Manager

North Eastern Railway

Gorakhpur – 273001

AWARD

1.

By order No. L-41011/40/2001-IR(B-I) dated:

08.01.2002 and its subsequent corrigendum dated

05.12.2002, the Central Government in the Ministry of

Labour, New Delhi in exercise of powers conferred by

clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of

Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947)

referred this industrial dispute between The Branch

Secretary, N.E. Railway Employees Union, P.R.K.S.,

Gorakhpur, C/o Shakha Mantri, Distt. Gorakhpur and the

General Manager, North Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur for

adjudication to this CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow.

2.

The reference under adjudication is:

“Whether The Action of The Management of N.E.

Railway, Gorakhpur in not regularizing the Services

of 12 workmen as per list submitted by The Union

(Enclosed Herewith) as Railway Servant and also

Terminated them from the services w.e.f. 04.07.1990

are legal and justified? If not, what relief the

workmen are entitled?”

3.

The case of the workmen’s union, in brief, is that the

Railway Men’s Consumer Co-operative Society Ltd.

(hereinafter referred to as Society), a registered Society

under NER, Gorakhpur runs with the Co-operation of

Railways. The Society has nine units viz. Accounts

Canteen, CME Canteen, CCS Canteen, Press Canteen

Depot, TAB Canteen, Stores Canteen, Loco Shed Canteen,

Central Stores Canteen and Halwai Khana. The Society

collects the subscription from the employees of the Railway

and deposit a part of same to the Railway and in turn

Railway provides salary and other benefits to the

employees of Society after adding subsidy to the amount.

It is pleaded by the Union that the accounts of the all the

units of the Society were regulated by the Railways and

the orders/directions of Railway Board were applicable

upon all the employees of the Society. It is submitted that

the Society had 76 employees and they were transferred

amongst different units of Society as per requirement; also

they were sent to the outstations/elsewhere and for this

purpose they were also issued railway pass. It is submitted

by the Union that Hon’ble Apex Court in M.M.R. Khan

vs. Union of India, 1990 SC 937 AIR held that the

employees of such statutory canteens are to be treated as

Railway employee and as such, the Railway took over the

all the canteen along with entire establishment, including

its employees. It is alleged by the Union that on taking

over the establishment of Society the Railway absorbed

only 58 employees and terminated the 18 employees

without any rhyme or reason. It is submitted by the Union

that all the 76 employees were appointed by the

Administrator, Railway Men’s Consumer Co-operative

Society Ltd. and the Railway absorbed the employees by

adopting pick and choose method. It is also alleged by

the union that the management of NER absorbed Shri

Dhunai who was at serial No. 72 of the employees sparing

the workmen under present dispute viz. Shri Mo. Sagir

Khan S/o Nagir Khan, Ram Dev Singh S/o Jagat Singh,

Panpat Prasad S/o Balli, Ramakant Nishad S/o Jageshwar

Nishad, Kaushal Kishore Mishra S/o Brij Nandan Mishra,

Pramod Kumar Singh S/o Ram Adhin Singh, Hari Shankar

Ram S/o Basant Ram, Subhash Chandra S/o Hari Charan,

Tirthraj Giri S/o Bechu Goshain, Buddhi Ram s/o Shrawan,

Surya Bhan S/o Gorakh Nishad and Chandrma Prakash

Mishra S/o Babu Mishra. It is submitted that all the 12

workers were appointed by the Administrator w.e.f. 19.05.89

and working since then as casual labour/service boy and

their services had been terminated w.e.f. 04.07.90 instead

6260

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

of regularizing them. Accordingly, the Union has prayed

that the oral termination order dated 04.07.90 be set aside

and the workmen be regularized with consequential

benefits, including full back wages.

4.

The management of the NER has filed its written

statement; whereby it has denied the claim of the Union,

stating therein that the workmen under dispute had been

employees of the Society and they had never been

employees of the railway, therefore, there arise no question

of terminating their services at any point of time. It has

also been submitted that the Society was not registered

by the NER administration rather the same is registered

under Co-operative Societies, UP and the Rail

administration had no control over it. It is stated by the

management that the railway has been running canteens

through Co-operative Societies on ‘no profit no loss’ basis

for its employees and subsidy is being granted to such

Societies by the Railway. It is also stated that the Railway

administration has fixed certain number of employees in

such canteens and if the Societies appoint the employees

in excess, without approval of the Railways, then no

subsidy is being granted to such employees. It was further

submitted that the workmen under dispute are appointees

of such unapproved category who were appointed by the

Society. The railway does not recognize such employees

and no subscription were ever paid by the Societies and

the railway did not pay any salary to the workmen under

dispute. It has been pleaded that number of recognized

employees in the recognized/subsidized canteen by the

railway, before 01.04.90 was only 58 and rest employees

were appointed by the Society on its own and railway has

no relation with such employees. It has also been

submitted by the management that the railway paid

subsidy to 58 employees only and paid them salary etc.

and has also absorbed them. It is stated that the railway

has no concern with the other employees who have been

appointed by the Society without approval of the railways.

Accordingly, the management has prayed that the claim

of the workmen’s union be rejected being devoid of any

merit.

5.

The workmen’s union has field its rejoinder wherein

apart from reiterating the averments already made in the

statement of claim has introduced nothing new.

6.

The parties have filed number of documentary

evidence, which include original as well as photocopy.

The workmen, union has examined the workmen viz.

Panpat Prasad, Subhash Chandra, Hari Shankar Ram,

Kaushal Kishore, Rama Kant, Ram Dev Singh, Mo. Sageer

Khan, Pramod Kumar Singh and Suraj Bhan; whereas the

management examined Shri Amiya Rama, Senior Personnel

Officer, Shri Vishwamitra Mishra, Administrator, Consumer

Co-operative Society and Shri J.F Ahmed, Superintendent,

CPO Office in support their respective claim. The parties

availed opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses of each

other apart from forwarding oral arguments.

7.

Heard authorized representatives of the parties and

perused entire material available on record.

8.

The authorized representative of the workmen’s

union has contended that the workman had been working

in the Canteen run by Society, which was given subsidy

by the NER administration and on directives of the Hon’ble

Apex Court, the management absorbed only 58 employees

out of 76 employees working in such Canteens. It was

argued that the workmen under dispute have been

appointed by the administrator of the Canteen viz. Shri

Vishwamitra who has stated in his oral evidence before

this Court that he appointed them and their appointment

letters find reference on record. It is also contended by

the authorized representative that the management was

required to regularized all the employees, working in such

recognized/subsidized canteens; but it has spared the

workmen arbitrarily and has adopted pick and choose

method. It also regularized some juniors. It was pointed

out that one Shri Dhunai who was junior to the workmen

was regularized; whereas the services of the workmen

under dispute were terminated without any notice or

compensation instead of regularizing them.

9.

In rebuttal, the authorized representative of the

management has contended that the NER had no control

over the Society nor it was registered with the NER; rather

the same was registered with the Co-operative Society

U.P. It is also argued that the these canteens are run

through Consumer Societies on “no profit no loss basis”

as welfare measure and subsidy is being given towards

salary paid to the employees of such Canteen. It is urged

that number of employees in recognized union before

01.04.90 was 98 and rest were appointed by the Society

and the Railway has no relation with them; accordingly,

only 58 employees were regularized pursuant to the

directions given by Hon’ble Supreme Court.

10.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the

rival submissions of the authorized representatives of the

parties and scanned entire evidence on record.

11.

The workmen’s union has examined workmen who

have stated that they have been appointed by the

Administrator of the Society viz. Shri Vishwamitra and their

appointment letter is on record. They also stated that the

Canteen had been taken over by the NER on 03.07.90 and

they were in employment on that date. It is also stated

that while absorbing no examination was taken of the

employees who were absorbed and Shri Dhunai who was

junior to them even then he was regularized. It was also

stated that no notice or compensation or charge sheet

was given to them.

In rebuttal, the management witness, Shri Amiya

Raman, Senior Personnel Officer has stated, referring paper

No. C-22 filed on 09.11.2005, that the Railway Board on

13.04.87, issued an order; whereby it notified that there

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6261

should not be any increase in the number of employees in

the canteens, therefore, the Society was required not to

increase the number of its employees. It was also stated

that claim of the workman, Mo. Sagir that he was appointed

on 01.06.89, is in contravention to the directions contained

in Railway Board’s letter dated 13.04.87. The management

witness, Shri Vishwamitra Mishra, Administrator, Consumer

Co-operative Society has stated that he was appointed

administrator in 88 and in capacity of Administrator he

was authorized to make appointment. It was admitted by

him that when he took charge the number of employees

were 58 and number of sanctioned employees were 74. It

was also admitted that the appointment letters which find

reference on record, paper no. 32/4 to 32/14 & 48/4 were in

his signatures; and Shri Dunai was also appointed by him

who was regularized.

12.

Having gone through the evidence, it becomes

apparent that the management has come up with the case;

firstly that the NER had no control over the Society but on

the other hand it has also pleaded that the Railway runs

canteen with the help of Society on no profit no loss basis

and subsidy is being given to pay salary to the employees

working in such canteen. Hence, in view of the above it

appears that the railway is trying to take two different

stand in the same situation i.e. the pleading of having no

control on one hand and then pleadings of running

Canteen with Society and extending subsidy to it on the

other. Therefore, the pleadings of the NER is not reliable

that it had no control over the Society/canteen

Secondly, the management has come up with the

case that approved number of the employees in recognized

canteens was 58 and accordingly, they were regularized,

sparing excess employees. But it could not show any

documentary proof that the sanctioned strength of such

employees were 58 only and any action was taken by the

management against the Administrator of such canteens

who appointed employees in excess to the sanctioned

strength without the approval of the Competent Authority/

Railway Board. It is not disputed that the Administrator

was authorized to make appointment. It was admitted by

him before this Tribunal that sanctioned strength of the

employees in the canteen was 74.

13.

It is also the case of the management that there

should not be any increase in the number of employees in

the canteens, therefore, the Society was required not to

increase the number of its employees in canteens vide

Railway Board’s letter dated 13.04.87. Therefore, any

appointment after the issuance of letter dated 13.04.87,

without approval of the Railways was illegal; hence need

not to be given any benefit.

From perusal of the appointment letters of the

workmen on record and statement of the workman’s witness

and Management witnesses, it becomes crystal clear that

the letter dated 13.04.87 of the Railway Board, relied on by

the management, had come into force much before

appointment of the Administrator, Shri Viswamitra Mishra

who was appointed in the year 1988 and appointment of

workmen under dispute, who were appointed on 01.06.89.

The letter dated 13/4/87 is reproduced hereunder:

“No. E(W)83CN1-8

New Delhi, dated 13/4/87

The General Managers,

All India Railways Including

CLW, DLW, ICF, W&A Plant, Bangalore

And Metro Railway, Calcutta.

The Director General

R.D.S.O.

Lucknow

The Principal

IRISET

Secunderabad.

The Chief Administrative Officer

Diesel Component Works

Patiala

Sub : Setting up of new statutory/non-statutory canteens

on the Railways.

Attention is invited to the provisions contained in

para 2031 of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual,

governing the principles for setting up of canteens on the

Railways which inter-alia lay down that “any scheme for

the provision of new canteens should be submitted to the

Board for approval indicating the financial implications

duly vetted by the FA&CAO”. Further, instructions were

conveyed vide Board’s letter No. E(W) 63CN1-2 dated

9/7/63 specifically in respect of non-statutory canteens

provided other than under the Factories Act, 1948.

2.

Board desire that the above instructions should be

reiterated to the Zonal Railways etc. to ensure full

compliance with the manual provisions. Accordingly, no

commitment should be made nor expenditure incurred for

setting up of new statutory/non-statutory canteens as

also increase in the staff strength in any of the existing

canteens without Board’s prior approval.

-sd-

(P. L. N. SHARMA)

Desk Officer, Estt. (Welfare)

Railway Board.”

The management of Railways has contended that

when the Railway had issued instructions vide above letter

dated 13/4/87, any appointment in the Canteen thereafter,

was in contravention to the instructions contained in letter

dated 13.04.87; hence, appointments made by the

Administrator was not just hence the same could not be

regularized. But from perusal of above letter dated 13.04.87

it is very much clear that the above instructions were for

seeking prior approval of the Board before setting up of

6262

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

new statutory/non-statutory canteens on the Railways

and not for the appointment of employees in the statutory/

non-statutory canteens already running/existing. Hence,

the case of the Society/Canteen in the present case is not

governed by the letter dated 13.04.87 of the Railway Board.

Therefore, the appointment made by the Administrator,

who was authorized to make appointment in the Canteen

cannot be said to be illegal, inasmuch as the Railway paid

salary to the workmen under question vide paper No. C-81

to C-90.

The management witness, in his examination-in-chief

has stated that sanctioned strength was 58 only and in

the salary bill for the month of March, 90 names of 18

persons was increased to give undue benefit in the light

of Hon’ble High Court’s order. But there is no evidence

on record to show that the Railway took any corrective

measure against above payment, which was made in excess

to the sanctioned strength. This goes to show that actually

the sanctioned strength was more than 58 and the Canteen/

Society in question was not governed by the instructions

issued vide letter dated 13.04.87 of the Board. The

management of NER was required to regularize the services

of the workmen under dispute with other workmen who on

the rolls of the society on 03.07.90. The management acted

arbitrarily and adopted pick and choose method; and

instead of regularizing the services of the workmen,

terminated their services orally w.e.f. 04.07.90 without

following the due procedure laid down in the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947.

14.

The workman has come up with the case that the

management regularized one Shri Dhunai who was junior

to the workmen under dispute. In this regard the statement

of management witness, Shri Vishwamitra Mishra, the

Administrator is relevant, in his cross-examination it was

stated that he appointed Shri Dhunai in the Canteen who

has been regularized and is working as regular appointee

as on date. From above statement of Shri Vishwamitra it

comes out that all the workmen under dispute as well as

Shri Dhunai were appointed by him. Therefore, the

appointments made by Shri Vishwamitra after 1988, if they

were governed by the letter dated 13.04.87, then all of

them were injust and all of them including, Dhunai were

not liable to be regularized. Here in the instant case the

management has regularized Dhunai, who was appointed

after 1988, this again goes to show that provisions of letter

dated 13.04.87 were not applicable on the Society/Canteen

under dispute and the action of the management of NER

in not regularizing the services of the workmen under

dispute was illegal as it regularized another workman

Dhunai who was appointed by the same Administrator

after issuance of letter dated 13.04.87.

15.

Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances of

case and discussions made hereinabove, I am of the

considered opinion that the workmen were appointed by

the Administrator of the canteen; and all the workmen,

under dispute were required to be regularized in terms of

directions of Hon’ble Apex Court; accordingly, I come to

the conclusion that the action of the management of NER

in not regularizing the workmen and terminating them w.e.f.

04.07.1990 was not only illegal but also unjustified.

Therefore, the workmen whose cause is espoused in the

present industrial dispute are entitled for reinstatement &

regularization w.e.f. 03.07.1990, the date when the canteen

was taken over by the NER.

16.

Award as above.

Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer

LUCKNOW.

20th August, 2014

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2468-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh; LVsV

cSad ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp]

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k] ukxiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 03@2011) dks izdkf'kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&12011@30@2010&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2468.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 03/2011)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,

Nagpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute

between the management of State Bank of India and

their workmen, received by the Central Government on

08/09/2014.

[No. L-12011/30/2010-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER,

CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

Case No. CGIT/NGP/03/2011

Date: 27.08.2014.

Party No. 1 : The Asstt. General Manager (Admin.),

State Bank of India, Regional Office,

Region VI, Sardar Vallabbhai Patel

Marg, Kingsway, Nagpur (M.S.).

Versus

Party No. 2 : The Vice President,

State Bank of India Staff Union,

C/o State Bank of India,

Regional Office, Kingsway,

Nagpur (M.S.).

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6263

AWARD

(Dated: 27th August, 2014)

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of

sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (“the Act” in

short), the Central Government has referred the industrial

dispute between the employers, in relation to the

management of State Bank of India and their workman,

Shri A.B. Jadhav, for adjudication, as per letter No.L-12011/

30/2010-IR (B-I) dated 30.03.2011, with the following

schedule:-

“Whether the action of the management of State

Bank of India Region VI Nagpur, in imposing the

punishment of dismissal on Shri A.B. Jadhav, Ex

Messenger, on the basis of departmental enquiry

with effect from 20.07.2007 is legal and justified? If

not, what relief the workman is entitled to?”

2.

On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed

to file their respective statement of claim and written

statement, in response to which, the workman Shri A.B.

Jadhav, (“the workman” in short) filed the statement of

claim and the management of State Bank of India, (“Party

No. 1” in short) filed their written statement.

The case of the workman as presented in the

statement of claim is that he was working as a Messenger

at Mahagaon Branch of Party No. 1, situated in the district

of Yavatmal and on 12.11.2002, he was detailed in the cash

department and on that date, one of the customers of the

branch, namely, M/s Manoj Traders tendered a cheque

for cash withdrawal, but the said customer failed to collect

the payment till the end of the day and as such, the cashier

handed over the cash to Shri Sonkusare, the In-charge

Dy. Manager (Cash) in total adherence of the norms of the

Bank and it was alleged that Shri Sonkusare kept the said

cash of Rs. 30,000 in an unlocked drawer of the cash

department and in late hours of the night, it was found

that the cash of Rs. 30,000 was missing and on 13.11.2002,

Shri A.N. Khandale, one of the guards of the Bank allegedly

received a phone call from one Mr. Deshmukh from

Umarkhed and the said telephonic talk revealed that the

Dy. Manager (Cash) had given Mr. Deshmukh Rs. 30,000

and the amount of Rs. 30,000 was dropped in the Post Box

at Pusad and the Branch Manager enquired about the

same from the Post Master and an amount of Rs. 20,000 in

an envelope was found in the said post box and the rest

amount Rs. 10,000 was found by him (workman) in the

branch premises and he promptly handed over the said

amount to the Branch Manager and without holding any

preliminary enquiry, the Party No. 1 filed a F.I.R. on

16.11.2002 at the police station, Pusad and in the said

F.I.R., he was arrayed as the prime suspect and he

approached the Competent Court and was released on

anticipatory bail and he continued to work in the branch.

The further case of the workman is that on 08.03.2006, a

charge sheet was served on him on the allegation that the

cash of Rs. 30,000, which was kept by the In-charge Dy.

Manager (Cash) in the drawer of central table of cash

department was stolen by him and the alleged incident

was of the year 2002 and charge sheet was given on

08.03.2006 and there was no explanation as to why there

was delay of about almost four years in giving the charge-

sheet and the delay in serving the charge-sheet and

conducting the departmental enquiry itself goes to show

that he was not responsible for the incident and as the

matter was reported in the news paper, somebody was

required to make the scapegoat and on the above

allegations, the enquiry was conducted against him and

he witnesses of the Bank spoke like puppet, before the

Enquiry Officer, as they wanted to save the officer of the

Bank and management failed to bring home the guilt against

him, but in spite of the same, he was held guilty of the

charges and the punishment of his removal from services

was passed and the appeal preferred by him, before the

Appellate Authority was also rejected and the punishment

was imposed against him only on mere suspicion, which

is clear from the order of the Appellate Authority and the

punishment is shockingly disproportionate, looking to the

service conditions of messengers and the findings of the

Enquiry Officer are far away from the evidence on record

and he was made the scapegoat to save the officer and the

findings of the Enquiry Officer are patently perverse and

required to be quashed and set aside and the Disciplinary

Authority without considering the materials on record

independently, simply believing on the report of the

Enquiry Officer passed the order of punishment on

20.07.2007.

It is further pleaded by the workman that he was

acquitted in the criminal case registered against him U/s

381 of I.P.C. on 25.02.2011 by the Judicial Magistrate First

Class and in view of his acquittal in the criminal case, the

punishment imposed against him in the departmental

enquiry is to be set aside and his past clean and

unblemished service record was not considered while

inflicting the punishment and the Party No. 1 has already

recovered a sum of Rs. 20,000 from him and as such, there

was no loss to Party No. 1 and he is entitle for reinstatement

in service with continuity and full back wages.

3.

In the written statement, the Party No. 1 has pleaded

inter-alia that the workman was working as messenger in

cash department at Pusad Branch from June, 1993 to

08.12.2003 and on 21.11.2002, a customer, M/s Manoj

Traders tendered a cheque of Rs. 30,000 for cash payment,

through an employee and the said customer did not turn

up till 5.30 p.m., so the dealing cashier handed over the

cash to the cash officer, in presence of the Deputy Head

Cashier and the Cash Officer kept the said cash in the

drawer of the center table kept inside the strong room of

6264

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

the branch before leaving the branch and the cash officer

had doubt about locking of the drawer and hence, the

cash officer and the Deputy Head Cashier returned to the

branch at about 8.30 p.m. to verify as to whether the drawer

was locked or not and they reopened the locker and found

the cash missing and the Head Cashier reported the matter

to the Branch Manager and on enquiry by the Branch

Manager, the temporary Watchman revealed that at about

7.30 p.m., he along with the workman entered the cash

cabin, where the cash was kept, to check the almirahs and

strong room etc and on 13.11.2002, the workman handed

over cash of Rs. 10,000/- to the Branch Manager stating

that the same was lying near the center table of cash

department and on 13.11.2002 itself, the Watchman on duty

received a phone call at about 8.30 p.m. and the caller

informed the Watchman about someone putting of

Rs. 20,000/- in the letter box of Pusad Post Office and the

Branch Manager recovered Rs. 20,000/- from the Postal

Authorities after lodging the F.I.R. and all the facts and

circumstances of the incident pointed out the needle of

suspicion towards the workman and as such, after making

enquiry and collecting relevant documents, the matter was

reported to the controllers of the Branch and a charge

sheet was submitted against the workman on 08.03.2006

and a supplementary charge sheet was submitted on

29.08.2006 and the workman was asked to submit his

explanation and as the explanation submitted by the

workman was found not satisfactory, it decided to hold

the enquiry against him and the enquiry commenced on

12.07.2006 and the same was concluded on 10.11.2006 and

there were nine sittings in total and the Bank examined

seven witnesses and produced 23 documents in support

of its case and the workman was represented by the

experienced and competent union representative and the

witnesses for the management were cross-examined by

the defence representative of the workman and the

workman also submitted his written submission to the

Enquiry Officer on 21.11.2006 and the Enquiry Officer

submitted his report on 30.11.2006, holding all the charges

to have been proved against the workman and the

Disciplinary Authority agreed with the findings of the

Enquiry Officer and show cause notice dated 15.03.2007

was issued to the workman along with the copy of the

report of the Enquiry Officer and show cause notice dated

15.03.2007 was issued to the workman along with the copy

of the report of the Enquiry Officer, to show cause against

the proposed punishment of removal from services with

superannuation benefits and the workman submitted his

reply to the show cause notice on 19.04.2007 and the

workman was granted personal hearing on 26.06.2007 and

the Disciplinary Authority duly considered the enquiry

report and examined the entire matter independently and

passed the final order of punishment of removal of the

workman from services with superannuation benefits and

the workman preferred an appeal against the order of

punishment before the appellate Authority on 05.09.2007

and opportunity of personal hearing was given to the

workman on 05.10.2007 and the Appellate Authority after

considering all the facts and circumstances of the case,

dismissed the appeal by order dated 20.05.2009 and the

workman is not entitled to any relief.

4.

In the rejoinder, the workman has reiterated some of

the facts as already mentioned in the statement of claim.

5.

As this is a case of removal of the workman from

services as a punishment, after conducting of a

departmental enquiry, the fairness or otherwise of the

departmental enquiry was taken up as a preliminary issued

for consideration and vide order dated 21.01.2014, the

departmental enquiry conducted against the workman was

held to be legal, proper and in accordance with the principles

of natural justice.

6.

At the time of argument, it was submitted by the

learned advocate for the workman that at the time of

submission of the charge sheet against the workman, he

had already rendered 21years of service as messenger/

peon and his service record was clean and unblemished

and it is clear from the materials on record that the workman

found a cash of Rs. 10,000/- in the branch premises and he

handed over the same promptly to the Branch Manager

and without holding any preliminary enquiry at the branch

level of the Bank or the Bank level, the Bank Authorities

filed a FIR on 16.11.2002 at Pusad Police Station arraying

the workman as he prime suspect and on 08.03.2006, the

charge sheet was submitted against the workman and the

workman was made the scape-goat and the charges

levelled against the workman were totally bogus and

concocted and there was delay of almost four years in

submitting the charge sheet and there was no explanation

for such delay and as such, there was violation of the

principles of natural justice and in the enquiry, the

witnesses examined by the management spoke like

puppets, because, they wanted to save the officers

involved in the incident and management also failed to

prove the charges levelled against the workman and only

on the basis of suspicion, it was held by the Enquiry Officer

that the charges were proved against the workman and

the findings of the Enquiry Officer are far away from the

evidence on record and without scrutinizing the evidence

in its proper perspective, the Enquiry Officer reached into

wrong conclusions and the findings of the Enquiry Officer

are perverse and the Appellate Authority also without

application of mind and basing on the perverse findings

of the enquiry Officer imposed the punishment of removal

of the workman from service and the punishment is

shockingly disproportionate and as such, the punishment

is to be quashed and set aside.

It was further submitted by the learned advocate for

the workman that the workman was acquitted in the

criminal case by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class

by judgment dated 25.02.2011 and the judicial finding

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6265

should prevail over the administrative finding and on that

ground also, the punishment inflicted upon the workman

is required to be quashed and set aside. It was also

submitted by the learned advocate for the workman that

before inflicting the punishment, the past clean and

unblemished service record of the workman was not

considered by the Authority and Bank has already

recovered the sum of Rs. 20,000/- from the workman and

as such, the Bank has not put into any loss and on that

grounds also the punishment is liable to be set aside and

the workman is entitled for his reinstatement in service

with continuity, full back wages and all other consequential

benefits.

7.

Per contra, it was submitted by the learned advocate

for the party No.1 that the workman has drafted the

statement of claim as if he is in appeal before the Tribunal

and the workman has made an attempt to prove that

departmental enquiry is like a criminal trial and principles

of criminal jurisprudence are applicable to such enquiry

and the power of this tribunal is of review only, except

when it is found that the enquiry is held against the

principles of natural justice or that the punishment is

shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct, as

provided under section 11-A of the Act.

It was further submitted by the learned advocate for

the party No.1 that where the Tribunal does not find any

fault with the proceeding conducted by the enquiry officer,

it does not have any jurisdiction to re-appreciate the

evidence and set aside the order of the disciplinary

authority on the ground of insufficiency of evidence to

prove the charges and Tribunal cannot sit in appeal over

the findings of the disciplinary authority and in this case

it has already been held by the Tribunal that the

departmental enquiry held against the workman to be valid

and the findings of the enquiry officer are based on the

evidence on record and not an any extraneous material

and in the entire statement of claim, there is no whisper as

to how the findings of the enquiry officer are perverse and

a such, it cannot be said that the findings are perverse. It

was also submitted that in banking business, absolute

devotion, diligence, integrity and honesty need to be

preserved by every bank employee and the charges

proved against the workman are serious in nature and the

bank has lost confidence in the workman and as such, the

punishment imposed against the workman cannot be said

to be shockingly disproportionate and the punishment is

just and proper and there is no scope to interfere with the

punishment and therefore, the workman is not entitled to

any relief.

In support of the contentions, reliance was placed

by the learned advocate for the party No.1 on the decisions

reported in 2005 SCC (L&S)-567 (Damoh Panna Sagar Rural

Regional Bank Vs. Munna Lal Jain), 2005-SCC (L & S)-200

(D.M. Plantation Div. Andaman Nicobar Islands Vs.

Munna Barriok, 1998 (4) SSC-310 (Union Bank of India Vs.

Vishaw Mohan), 1999 LAB IC-3833 (SC) (High Court of

Judicature, Bombay Vs. S.S. Patil), (2011) 2 SCC (L & S)-

461 (Samar Bahadur Singh Vs. State of UP), AIR 1989 SC-

1185 (Union of India Vs. Parmananda), 2005 SCC (L & S)-

407 (Div. Controller Vs. A.T. Mane), (2010) 2 SCC (L& S)-

239 (UPSRTC Vs. Suresh Chand), 2003 SCC (L & S)-468

(CMD, UCO Bank Vs. P.C. Kakkar), 2005 SCC (L & S)-833

(Canara Bank Vs. V.K. Awasthy) and some others.

Now, keeping in view the principles enunciated by

the Hon’ble Apex Court in the decisions cited by the

learned advocate for the party No.1, the present case in

hand is to be considered.

8.

Before delving into the merit of the matter, I think it

proper to mention the settled principles regarding the

power of a Tribunal in interfering with punishment awarded

by the competent authority in departmental proceedings

and regarding the effect of acquittal of an employee by a

criminal court, against whom a departmental proceedings

was also initiated, by the Hon’ble Apex Court.

9.

First of all, I will take up the contention raised by the

learned advocate for the workman that inspite of the clean

cut acquittal of the workman ion the criminal case and

production of the order of acquittal before the concerned

authorities of the party No.1, they did not consider the

same and proceeded with the departmental proceedings

and imposed the punishment and as such, the punishment

imposed against the workman is liable to be set aside.

In this regard, it is well settled in a number of

decisions by the Hon’ble Apex Court that, “Question of

considering reinstatement after decision of acquittal or

discharge by a competent criminal court arises only and

only if dismissal from services was based on conviction

by criminal court in view of provisions of Art. 311 (2) second

proviso (a) of Constitution or analogous provisions in

statutory rules applicable in a case. In case where enquiry

is independent of criminal proceedings, acquittal in a

criminal court, domestic inquiry can be held, since standard

of proof required in a domestic enquiry and that in a criminal

case are different and facts, charges and nature of evidence,

etc. involved in an individual case would determine as to

whether decision of acquittal would have any bearing on

the findings recorded in the domestic inquiry and once

the delinquent employee was found guilty of all the

charges and there was due adherence to natural justice

while conducting domestic enquiry, punishment of

dismissal was proportionate to delinquency.”

It is also well settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court

that, “Criminal prosecution vis-à-vis departmental action-

Standard of proof- In criminal case, proof required is proof

beyond reasonable doubt, while in domestic enquiry it is

proof on preponderance of probabilities.”

6266

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Judging the present case in hand with the touch

stone of the principles as mentioned above, it is found

that the departmental enquiry conducted against the

workman was independent of the criminal proceedings

and the dismissal of the workman from service was not

based on conviction of the Criminal court. It is also found

that the charges levelled against the workman and the

witnesses examined in the departmental inquiry and

criminal cases were not the same were identical. Hence,

the acquittal of the workman in the criminal case is of no

help to him and there was nothing wrong on the part of

the authorities of party No.1 in not taking into

consideration the acquittal of the workman in the criminal

case.

9.

So far the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to interfere

with the disciplinary matter of punishment is concerned,

in a number of decisions including in the decisions cited

by the learned advocate for the party No.1 in this regard,

the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that :-

“The jurisdiction of the Tribunal to interfere with

the disciplinary matters of punishment cannot be equated

with an appellate jurisdiction. The Tribunal cannot interfere

with the findings of the Inquiry officer or competent

authority where they are not arbitrary or utterly perverse.

The power to impose penalty on a delinquent officer is

conferred on the competent authority either by an Act of

legislature or rules made under the provison to Article 309

of the Constitution of India. If there has been an enquiry

consistent with the rules and in accordance with principles

of natural justice what punishment would meet the ends

of justice is a matter exclusively within the jurisdiction of

the competent authority. If the penalty can lawfully be

imposed and is imposed on the proved misconduct, the

Tribunal has no power to substitute its own discretion for

that of the authority. The adequacy of penalty unless it is

malafide is certainly not a matter of the Tribunal to concern

itself with. The Tribunal also cannot interfere with the

penalty if the conclusion of the Inquiry officer or the

competent authority is based on evidence even if some of

it is found to be irrelevant or extraneous to the matter.

In departmental proceedings, the disciplinary

authority is the sole judge of facts and in case an appeal is

presented to the appellate authority, the appellate authority

has also the power/and jurisdiction to re-appreciate the

evidence and come to its own conclusion, on facts, being

the sole fact-finding authorities. Once findings of fact,

based on appreciation of evidence are recorded, the High

Court in writ jurisdiction may not normally interfere with

those factual findings unless it finds that the recorded

findings were based either on no evidence or that the

findings were wholly perverse and/or legally untenable.

The adequacy or inadequacy of the evidence is not

permitted to be canvassed before the High Court. Since

the High Court does not sit as an appellate authority over

the factual findings recorded during departmental

proceedings, while exercising the power of judicial review,

the High Court cannot, normally speaking, substitute its

own conclusion, with regard to the guilt of the delinquent,

for that of the departmental authorities. Even insofar as

imposition of penalty or punishment is concerned, unless

the punishment or penalty imposed by the disciplinary or

the departmental appellate authority, is either impermissible

or such that it shocks the conscience of the High Court, it

should not normally substitute its own opinion and impose

some other punishment or penalty. Both the learned Single

Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court, it appears,

ignored the well-settled principle that even though judicial

review of administrative action must remain flexible and

its dimension not closed, yet the Court, in exercise of the

power of judicial review, is not concerned with the

correctness of the findings of fact on the basis of which

the orders are made so long as those findings are

reasonably supported by evidence and have been arrived

at through proceedings which cannot be faulted with for

procedural illegalities or irregularities which vitiate the

process by which the decision was arrived at. Judicial

review, it must be remembered, is directed not against the

decision, but is confined to the examination of the decision-

making process.

Departmental enquiry is not bound by the strict rules

of evidence Act, but by fair play and natural justice. Only

total absence but not sufficiency of evidence before

Tribunal is ground for interference by court.”

Applying the settled principles as mentioned above

to the case in hand, it is found that this is not a case of no

evidence or that the findings of the Enquiry Officer are

totally against the evidence on record. From the materials

on record, it is found that the Enquiry Officer has based

his findings on the materials on record of the enquiry and

not on any extraneous material. The Enquiry Officer has

also assigned reasons in support of his findings. So, the

findings of the Enquiry Officer cannot be said to be

perverse.

10.

So far the proportionality of the punishment is

concerned, it was submitted by the learned advocate for

the workman that the amount of Rs. 20,000/- was already

recovered from the workman and there was no loss to the

party No.1 and as such, the punishment of dismissal of

the workman from service is patently a harsh punishment

and the same is liable to be set aside. It is to be mentioned

here that it is well settled that absence of any lost to the

bank is no defence. A Bank employee has to exercise a

higher degree of honesty and integrity. The charges

levelled against the workman and proved in a properly

conducted departmental enquiry were not casual, but

serious in nature. So, the punishment of removal of the

workman from service with superannuation benefits

cannot be said to be shockingly disproportionate, call for

any interference. Hence, it is ordered:-

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6267

The action of the management of State Bank of India

Region VI Nagpur, in imposing the punishment of dismissal

on Shri A.B. Jadhav, Ex Messenger, on the basis of

departmental enquiry with effect from 20.07.2007 is legal

and justified. The workman is not entitled to any relief.

J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2469-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj mÙkj jsyos

izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa

fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k

y[kumQ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 10@2007) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS]

tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk Fkk A

¹la- ,y&41012@174@2004&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2469.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 10/2007) of

the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,

Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial

dispute between the management of North Railway and

their workmen, received by the Central Government on

08/09/2014.

[No. L-41012/174/2004-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL–CUM-LABOUR COURT LUCKNOW

PRESENT : Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer

I.D. No. 10/2007

Ref. No. L-41012/174/2004-IR(B-I) dated 14.02.2007

BETWEEN

Shri Dwarika, S/o Shri Bache Lal

Gangman, Village – Jignia Kala

Post – Bahorva, Janpad

Hardoi (Distt.)

AND

The Station Master

Northern Railway

Railway Administration

Hardoi (Distt.)

AWARD

1.

By order No. L-41012/174/2004-IR(B-I) dated

14.02.2007 the Central Government in the Ministry of

Labour, New Delhi in exercise of powers conferred by

clause (d) of sub section (1) and sub section (2A) of Section

10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) referred

this industrial dispute between Shri Dwarika, S/o

Shri Bache Lal, Gangman, Village – Jignia Kala, Post –

Bahorva, Janpad, Hardoi (Distt.) and the Station Master,

Northern Railway, Railway Administration, Hardoi (Distt.)

and the Station Master, Northern Railway, Railway

Administration, Hardoi (Distt.) for adjudication to this

CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow.

2.

The reference under adjudication is:

¶D;k xSaxesu Jh }kfjdk iq=k csps yky] fuoklh xzke ftfxfu;k¡

dyk¡] iksLV cgksjok¡] tuin gjnksbZ dks jsy iz'kklu }kjk ewyr% ,d

vkdfLed Jfed ds :i esa fu;qfDr mijkUr fnukad 31-12-77 ls

LFkk;h djus ds mijkUr mldk LFkkukUrj.k LVs'ku ekLVj gjkZokyk

(nsgjknwu) fd;k tkuk ,oa Jh }kfjdk }kjk ogk¡ 23-10-87 ls 14-12-

88 ,oa e.Myh; jsy izcU/d] mÙkj jsyos] eqjknkckn esa fnukad 15-

12-88 ls 6-2-89 rd dk;Z e.My jsy izcU/d] mÙkj jsyos eqjknkckn

ds LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k i=k la[;k&bZ@10@'ka-iks-@89 fnukad 7-2-89 ds

mijkUr Hkh Jh }kfjdk dks xSaxesu ds in ij jsy iFk fujh{kd] m-

jsyos] gjnksbZ ,oa LVs'ku ekLVj] m- jsyos] gjnksbZ }kjk fcuk dkj.k

dk;Z ij u fy;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr gS \ ;fn ugha rks deZdkj fdl

ikfjrksf"kd dks ikus dk vf/dkjh gS\¸

3.

The case of the workman, Dwarika, in brief, is that

he was engaged against regular vacant post of class IV

employee on 31.12.1977 by the opposite party and worked

as such, continuously for 12 years and 6 months. It is

stated by the workman that during his service period he

was not given any warning or charge sheet, even then the

management has dismissed him from services maliciously.

It has been alleged by the workman that the management

has dismissed him from services without any notice or

charge sheet or any written order or any formal domestic

inquiry. Accordingly, the workman has prayed that the

management of the railways may be directed to reinstate

him into the services with continuity in services and back

wages.

4.

The management of the Northern Railway has

submitted its written statement denying the allegations of

the workman; wherein it has submitted that the workman

was engaged as category D staff and was promoted to the

post of the post of shunting porter vide order dated

11.08.87 and was relieved to join his duty under the Station

Master, NR, Harrawala on 23.10.87. On joining to his new

place of duty the workman as required to undergo a

psychological test/examination; but he could not succeed

the same, resultantly, the workman as reverted back to his

original post of Gangman vide letter dated 07.02.89. On

reversion/transfer back to his original post in DRM, NR,

Moradabd the workman did not report to join his duties at

Hardoi without assigning any reason or protest. It has

been stated by the management that it was the workman

who did not turn for joining the duty at his transfer place

not moved any application regarding leave etc. It is

specifically stated by the management that the no dismissal

order has been passed by the management against the

workman till date. Accordingly, the management has

pleaded that it is not the management who has dismissed

6268

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

his services but actually it is the workman who did not

turn at his transfer place to join his duties since 07.02.89.

The management has also submitted that the workman

has preferred present industrial dispute after a long gap of

about 18 years, hence the claim of the workman is liable to

be rejected being stale one and also being devoid of any

merit.

5.

The workman has filed his rejoinder; wherein apart

from stating the averment already made in the statement

of claim the workman has submitted that the management

of railways has transferred him to Hardoi without serving

any order of demotion etc. and he appeared before Rail

Track Inspector on 07.02.89 but he did not allow him to

join the duties. Regarding delay the workman has stated

that the Government after analyzing the causes of delay,

explained in the conciliation proceedings, has referred the

present industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal

hence, the plea of delay is not maintainable at this juncture.

6.

Parties filed documentary evidence as well as

adduced oral evidence in support of their respective claim.

The workman has examined himself whereas the

management has examined Shri Sanjay Kuamr Srivastava,

Rail Track Inspector, NR, Hardoi in support of their

pleadings. The parties availed opportunity to cross-

examine the witnesses of each other apart from forwarding

oral arguments in support of their case.

7.

The authorized representative of the workman has

contended that the workman on being transferred back to

Hardoi, reported on duty but he was not allowed to join

the duties. It is also argued that the workman has been

terminated by the management without serving any notice

or charge sheet or conducting any formal inquiry against

him, which amounted to the violation of the principles of

natural justice.

8.

Per contra, the authorized representative of the

management has argued that when the workman could

not qualify the prescribed medical test after his promotion

to the post of Shunting Porter, he was reverted back to his

original post and was transferred back to Hardoi; but he

seldom turned up at Hardoi to join his post and is absented

himself since 07.02.89. It is also contended by the

management that it has not dismissed the workman as no

dismissal order has been passed by the management till

date, therefore, there is no question of violation of

principles of natural justice whatsoever.

9.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the

rival contentions of the authorized representatives of the

parities and perused the record available in light thereto.

10.

The workman in his examination-in- chief has stated

that he has been transferred to Harrawala at Dehradun on

the post of Shunting Porter where he worked as such. On

14.12.88 he was transferred to DRM, Moradabad and

therefore, he appeared before DRM, Moradabad from

15.12.88 to 06.02.89 but he was not given any order for

joining at any other station. On 07.02.89 he was ordered

to join his duties on the post of Gangman at Hardoi Railway

Station, which was accepted by him but he was not allowed

to join since 07.02.88 till date. In cross-examination he has

stated that he was transferred from Harrawala to

Moradabad, from where he was directed to join at PWI

Office, Hardoi on the post of Gangman. It is also stated by

the workman that he made a protest representation before

DRM regarding asking him to join as Gangman when he

has passed the training for Shunting Porter. The workman

has stated that he was directed to join as Gangman vide

letter dated 07.02.89, the photocopy of which is paper No.

11/6. He also stated that he did not furnished the copy of

letter dated 07.02.89, paper No. 11/6 to the office Clerk of

PWI Office. It has also come in the evidence that he had

filed a case in the Central Administrative Tribunal. It was

further stated that he went to the PWI office, Hardoi lastly

in 1989 and at few occasions thereafter, but could not tell

the specific dates.

11.

The management has examined Shri Sanjay Kumar

Srivastava, Section Engineer, NR, Hardoi who stated in

his cross-examination that the workman was recruited on

the post of Gangman at Hardoi in 1970 and was made

permanent w.e.f. 31.12.77; and worked as such, till October,

1987 at Hardoi. He also stated that the workman was sent

to Moradabad from Harrawala and thereafter from

Moradabad he was sent to Hardoi Railway station on the

post of Gangman on 07.02.89. It was stated by the

management witness that keeping absent for long without

leave application is gross misconduct. He has further

deposed that the workman on transfer to Hardoi did not

turn either at Hardoi or at Moradabad or at Harrawala and

his attendance was not found marked at any place. The

management witness stated that no charge sheet was given

to the workman and no domestic inquiry was done in the

matter and also the workman was not paid any retrenchment

compensation etc.

12.

It is admitted case of the parties that the workman

was appointed on the post of Gangman w.e.f. 31.12.77 and

was promoted to the post of Shunting Porter and was

posted at Harrawala Station at Dehradun. Subsequently,

he was transferred to Moradabad Division from where he

was directed to join his duties as Gangman vide order

dated 07.02.89, paper No. 11/6, relied on by the workman.

It is the case of the workman that he reported on duty at

Hardoi Railway Station on 07.02.89 but he was not allowed

to join the services; on the contrary the management has

come up with the case that the workman never turned up

to join his duties at Hardoi Railway Station. The workman

has filed copy of letter dated 11.04.2003, paper No. 11/10-

11/12; and its subsequent reminder dated 02.03.2004, paper

No. 11/8, addressed to DRM, Moradabad regarding not

allowing the workman, Dwarika to join the services at

Hardoi. This goes to show that the workman for the first

time represented before the DRM, Moradabad for non-

joining on 11.04.2003 and thereafter a reminder was also

moved vide dated 02.03.3004. Further, the management

has filed copy of order dated 23.04.2001 in O.A. No. 546/

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6269

1994 between Dwarika vs. DRM, NR, Moradabad & others,

paper No. 21/221/3, filed before Central Administrative

Tribunal, Lucknow. Learned Tribunal while dismissing

the above original application, after considering the same

on merit, has observed as under:

4. From the documents of record, Annexures A-5 to

A-9, it appears that the applicant approached the

PWI, Hardoi to join the post after Annexure-A-4

was passed. However, the applicant was not allowed

to join. Though copies of Annexures-A-5 to A-9

have been filed but there is no receipt of these

representations. The respondents in para 11 of their

counter have submitted that Annexures A-5 to A-9

were not submitted by the applicant in the office of

the respondents, and no such representation is

pending. We also find that copies of the

representations Annexed at Annexures A-5 to A-9

do not bear any endorsement of receipt nor there is

any postal receipt for sending these representations

to the office of the respondents. As there is no

averment to show that these representations were

actually sent by the applicant to the respondents,

accordingly, it is held that these representations were

never sent by the applicant. In the absence of these

representations, if the applicant had any grievance

in the year 1989, he could have approached the

Tribunal within one year as per the provisions of

Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The O.A. was,

however, filed in the year 1994. Delay has not been

explained, nor there is any application for

condonation of delay. Accordingly, the O.A. is

barred by limitation.

From bare perusal of the above order of the learned

Tribunal it comes out that when the original application,

preferred by the workman, was dismissed by the Tribunal

on the point of unexplained delay and non-pendency of

any representation regarding not allowing him to join the

services, the workman tried to prepare grounds for his

present claim and moved the representation dated

11.04.2003, paper No. 11/10-11/12; and its subsequent

reminder dated 02.03.2004, paper No. 11/8 and submitted

the same to the management by registered post.

13.

The workman’s allegation is that he appeared at

Hardoi Railway Station in pursuance to the transfer orders;

but the authorities there did not allow him to join the

services on 07.02.89. The workman could not show any

evidence regarding this fact that he approached Hardoi

Railway Station after 07.02.89 for joining. He also could

not lead any evidence to the effect that on denial of joining

at Hardoi, he made any complaint/representation before

higher authorities regarding alleged denial of joining. It

was only after a long delay of more than 14 years he made

a representation before DRM, Moradabad on 11.04.2003

for alleged denial of joining to him. The workman has not

forwarded any explanation as to what prevented him to go

to the higher authorities immediately after 07.02.89 when

he was not allowed to join at Hardoi. No prudent man or

an employee who had put in more than 11 years’ services

will act like the workman has acted. He remained silent/

inactive up to 11.04.2003 for alleged injustice done to him.

Hence, the contention of the workman that he was not

allowed to join the duties, does not seems to be convincing.

14.

The management has pleaded that the case is stale

one and is suffering from vice of inordinate delay of 18

years on behalf of the workman, which is not explained by

the workman hence, the claim of the workman is liable to

be rejected. On the contrary the workman has pleaded

that the appropriate Government while referring the present

industrial dispute for adjudication has considered the

reasons of delay which was recited while conciliation

proceedings; and after considering the same it referred

the same to this Tribunal for adjudication. But no

explanation has been forwarded by the workman before

this Tribunal regarding delay either in making

representation before Railways or raising the industrial

dispute.

15.

Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Executive Engineer,

Public Works Department, Wardha vs. Namdeo Govindrao

Nandurkar, Wardha 2011 (129) FLR 1037, where the dispute

was raised after a delay of 11 years has observed as under:

“the Court cannot import the period of limitation

and the reference cannot be dismissed merely on

the ground of delay, it does not mean that

irrespective of the facts and circumstances of the

case, a stale claim must be entertained and the relief

should be granted. In case of delay, no formula of

universal application can be laid down and it would

depend upon the facts and circumstances of each

case. The Court dealing with the reference will have

to hold an enquiry and record it is finding on the

question whether the reference should be dismissed

on the ground of delay. In appropriate cases, the

court may mould the relief either by reducing the

back wages or by denying it completely. While

considering the question of delay, the Court will

have to be guided by certain principles, which are

culled out from various judgments of the Apex Court.

In the present case, the burden of proof was upon

the employee to show that the dispute was raised

with a reasonable time and to offer an explanation to

the satisfaction of the Court for the delay of 11 years

caused in seeking reference. Even on merits, no

evidence is placed on record to shift the onus upon

the employer. The reference was, therefore, stale

and was liable to be rejected on the sole ground.”

Further, Hon’ble Apex Court while dismissing the

writ petition (civil) No. 71 of 1992 between Ratan Chandra

Sammanta & Others vs. UoI & Others, where the casual

labourers of South Eastern Railway alleged to have been

appointed between 1968-69 and retrenched between 1975-78

6270

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

approached the Apex Court for a direction to the opposite

parties to give them re-employment, has observed as under:

“In absence of any fresh cause of action or any

legislation a person who has lost his remedy by

lapse of time before his right as well. From the date

of retrenchment if it is assumed to be correct a period

of more than 15 year has expired and in case we

accept the prayer of petitioner we would be depriving

a host of others who in the meantime have become

eligible and are entitled to claim to be employed.”

In Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and

Sewerage Board & Others vs. T.T. Murali Babu 2014 (141)

FLR 772, Hon’ble Apex Court has observed as under :

“The Court should bear in mind that it is exercising

an extraordinary and equitable jurisdiction. As a

Constitutional Court it has a duty to protect the

rights of the citizens but simultaneously it is to keep

itself alive to the primary principle that when an

aggrieved person, without adequate reason,

approaches the Court at his own leisure or pleasure,

the Court would be under legal obligation to

scrutinize whether the lis at a belated stage should

be entertained or not. Be it noted, delay comes in

the way of equity. In certain circumstances delay

and laches may be fatal but in most circumstances

inordinate delay would only invite disaster for the

litigant who knocks at the doors of the Court. Delay

reflects inactivity and inaction on the part of a litigant

– a litigant who has forgotten the basic norms,

namely, “procrastination is the greatest thief of time”

and second, law does not permit one to sleep and

rise like a phoenix. Delay does bring a hazard and

causes injury to the lis. In the case at hand, though

there has been four years’ delay in approaching the

Court, yet the writ Court chose not to address the

same. It is the duty of the Court to scrutinize whether

such enormous delay is to be ignore without any

justification.”

14.

In view of facts and circumstances of the case and

legal positions cited above, it appears that the workman

never approached the railway authorities for his joining or

moved any representation to the higher authorities for

not allowing him to join his services at Hardoi within

reasonable time. It was only when his original application

was dismissed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, the

workman, moved a representation dated 11.04.2003 before

DRM, NR, Moradabad on the issue. The workman has

utterly failed to explain the delay of about more than 18

years, in raising the present industrial dispute and in my

opinion, on this basis the present reference cannot be

answered in favour of the workman, being his claim to be

highly stale one.

15.

Accordingly, I come to the conclusion that the

workman, Dwarika is not entitled to any relief.

16.

Award as above.

Lucknow

22nd July, 2014

Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2470-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh; LVsV

cSad ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 17@2011) dks izdkf'kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&12012@91@2010&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2470.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 17/2011)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.

1, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial

dispute between the management of State Bank of India

and their workmen, received by the Central Government

on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-12012/91/2010-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, MUMBAI

Present : Justice G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer

REFERENCE NO. CGIT-1/17 OF 2011

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of

State Bank of India

And

Their workman (Vilas D.Dhongde)

Appearances :

For the State Bank of India : Mr. Nadkarni, Adv.

For the workman

: Mr. Kumar Vaidyanathan,

Adv.

State : Maharashtra

Mumbai, dated the 20th day of June, 2013.

AWARD

This is a reference made by the Central Government

in exercise of its powers under clause (d) of sub-section

(1) and sub-section (2-A) of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

The terms of reference given in the schedule are as follows:

“Whether the action of the management of State

Bank of India, Region-IV, Pune in dismissing Shri

Vilas Dattu Dhongde from service with effect from

1.11.2009, is legal and justified? To what relief the

workman is entitled to?”

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6271

2.

According to the statement of claim filed by the

workman Vilas Dattu Dhongde he came to be employed as

a peon by State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as

the Bank) at its Aswali branch on 12.1.2008. His last drawn

salary was Rs.3,460 p.m. He rendered service to the Bank

promptly and honestly from the date of his appointment

i.e. 12.1.2008 to the date of his termination i.e.1.11.2009.

The Bank illegally and wrongfully terminated his service

without following due process of law. The workman

completed 240 days of continuous service but he was

terminated in violation of the provisions of Section 25F of

the Act. He has, therefore, prayed that the Bank be directed

to reinstate him with full back wages and continuity of

service and other consequential benefits.

3.

According to the written statement filed by the Bank

the workman was engaged on ad-hoc basis and on daily

wage basis due to exigencies of the situation during the

period 12.1.2008 to 31.10.2009 and he was paid Rs.80 per

day and the amount was credited to his savings bank

account and maintained with the branch of the Bank. The

workman mainly worked as a canteen boy for serving tea

and coffee to staff members and sometimes he cleaned

the branch premises. On stray occasions, the services of

the workman might have been utilised for filling vouchers

etc. The workman was found untrustworthy. The workman

committed theft of registers and other documents of the

Bank and the Branch Manager filed a complaint against

the workman in the concerned Police Station on 2.6.2010.

The workman was also passing internal information of the

branch to the local people. The name of the workman was

not entered into the regular muster maintained at the

branch and the days on which he worked were recorded in

a kutcha register to ascertain the exact number of days for

which payment was required to be made to him. The

workman was merely engaged on casual basis and on daily

wages and he was disengaged when his services were not

needed. The Bank denied that the workman completed

240 days of continuous service in the Bank. The Bank

also stated that daily wagers were not entitled to the benefit

of Section 25-F of the Act. According to the written

statement the workman is not entitled to any relief.

4.

The workman has filed rejoinder wherein he has

reiterated his stand.

5.

The workman has filed his affidavit and he has been

cross examined by learned counsel for the Bank. The

Bank has filed affidavit of Ravindra Narayan Kapole who

has been cross examined by learned counsel for the

workman.

6.

Heard Mr.Kumar Vaidyanathan learned counsel for

the workman and Mr.Nadkarni learned counsel for the

Bank.

7.

Section 25-B of the Act defines continuous service.

In terms of sub-section (2) of Section 25-B if a workman

during a period of twelve calendar months preceding the

date with reference to which calculation is to be made has

actually worked under the employer for 240 days then he

will be deemed to be in continuous service. The burden of

proof is on the workman to show that he has worked for

240 days in preceding 12 months prior to his termination.

It is an admitted fact that the workman worked from

12.1.2008 to 31.10.2009. The workman has stated in his

affidavit that he completed more than 240 days of

continuous service in the Bank. In view of the above

statement of the workman the burden of proof shifted to

the Bank to prove that the workman did not complete 240

days of service in the requisite period because the workman

did not have access to the official documents, muster rolls

etc. in connection with his service. The Bank has not

produced any documentary evidence to prove that the

workman did not render continuous service for 240 days

in the requisite period. If the Bank, despite in possession

of the best evidence, does not produce the same then the

conclusion must go against the Bank. I am supported by

2009 III CLR 941. In this view of the matter I have come to

the conclusion that the workman has completed 240 days

of continuous service in the requisite period.

8.

The provisions contained in Section 25-F of the Act

are applicable even in a case of a daily wager. I am

supported by the judgement of Honourable Apex Court

reported in 2009 III CLR 941. It is not disputed that the

workman was terminated without complying with the

provisions of Section 25-F of the Act.

9.

It is thus clear from the above discussion that the

action of the Bank in dismissing the workman from service

is not justified as it is in violation of the provisions of

Section 25F of the Act.

10.

Now the question is that to what relief the workman

is entitled.

11.

The workman was a daily wager. His services were

terminated w.e.f.1.11.2009. In the facts and circumstance

of this matter the relief by way of reinstatement will be

wholly inappropriate. In my considered opinion

compensation instead of reinstatement will meet the ends

of justice.

12.

Looking to the length of service of the workman and

all other facts and circumstances of the matter. I have

come to the conclusion that a compensation of Rs.1,00,000

(one lakh) to the workman by the Bank will be appropriate

and will meet the ends of justice. The compensation be

paid within two months from today, failing which the same

will carry interest @ 9% p.a.

Award is passed accordingly.

Justice G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2471-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj if'pe jsyos

6272

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k la- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 10@2005) dks izdkf'kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&41012@93@2004&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º

lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014

S.O. 2471.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.10/2005)

of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.

2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial

dispute between the management of Western Railway

and their workmen, received by the Central Government

on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-41012/93/2004-IR (B-I)]

SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI

PRESENT : K. B. KATAKE, Presiding Officer

REFERENCE NO. CGIT-2/10 of 2005

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT

OF WESTERN RAILWAY

The Divisional Railway Manager (E),

Western Railway, Mumbai Division,

Mumbai Central

Mumbai-400 008.

AND

THEIR WORKMEN.

The President,

Indian Railway Technical Staff Association

2, Mahabir Yadav Chawl

Nagardas Road, Andheri (E)

Mumbai-400 058.

APPEARANCES :

FOR THE EMPLOYER :

Ms. Jyoti U. Panwalkar,

Advocate.

FOR THE WORKMEN :

Mr. M. B. Anchan, Advocate.

Mumbai, dated the 21st July, 2014.

AWARD PART-I

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour &

Employment by its Order No.L-41012/93/2004-IR (B-I),

dated 21.10.2004 in exercise of the powers conferred by

clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of

Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred

the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for

adjudication:

“Whether the action of the management of Western

Railway Administration viz DRM, Western Railway,

Mumbai Division, Mumbai in dismissing the services

of Shri Lalta Prasad is justified? If not, what relief

Shri Lalta Prasad is entitled to?”

1.

After receipt of the reference, notices were issued

to both the parties. In response to the notice, the second

party Union filed its statement of claim at Ex-9. According

to them the workman Shri Lalta Prasad working as a

Pointsman under the Station Superintendent, Western

Railway, Mumbai Central Mumbai. He had proceeded on

10 days sanctioned leave from 8/7/1984 to 17/7/1994 and

went to his native place. At his native place he was taken

ill and was suffering from mental depression and was taking

treatment from Doctor Aslam. As his condition was

deteriorating, his wife brought him back to Mumbai and

admitted him in Jagjivan Ram Railway Hospital, Mumbai

Central. From his native place the workman had informed

the office by telephone and had also written a letter to his

office about his illness. After coming to Mumbai again he

had informed his office by telephone about his illness. On

26/9/1994 he had also sent a registered letter and requested

for extension of his leave till his recovery. He was under

treatment upto 23/09/1996.

2.

On 23/9/1996 he resumed his duties with fitness

certificate. Since then he worked till the date of his removal

i.e. till 07/12/1997. The workman was served with a charge

sheet dt. 18/11/1996 for the alleged misconduct that he

remained unauthorisedly absent from 18/7/1994 to

23/09/1996. He was also charged for not informing to the

office the reasons regarding his absence from 18/07/1994

to 23/09/1996 and did not get his leave sanctioned from

competent authority on proper medical ground and did

not observe proper rule for obtaining leave. The inquiry

was against the principles of natural justice. The Inquiry

Office did not explain to the workman the procedure of

departmental inquiry neither asked him to submit his

explanation to the charge sheet. He was also not asked to

bring defence representative. He was not given the copy

of leave record. The workman was not acquainted with

English. The I.O. recorded the proceeding in English and

closed the inquiry. The I.O. did not give opportunity to

submit his written brief. The inquiry was not fair and

proper. The findings of the I.O. are perverse. On the basis

of report of the I.O., the disciplinary authority of first party

terminated the services of the workman. His appeal was

also dismissed illegally.

3.

The workman therefore raised industrial dispute

before ALC. As conciliation failed on the report of ALC,

the Central Labour Ministry has sent the reference to this

Tribunal. The workman therefore prays that the inquiry

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6273

be declared not fair and proper and findings of the I.O. be

declared perverse. The order of first party terminating the

service of the workman be set aside and the workman be

reinstated in service with full back wages.

4.

The first party Management resisted the statement

of claim vide its written statement at Ex-10. According to

them, the workman was working as Pointsman with the

Railway Administration. The category of Pointsman is

declared as Safety Category Post as per the extent rules.

A person appointed on the safety category post is imparted

with the field training related with the safety of the train

operations. As such workman is required to work with the

Station Master. Once a technical person is allotted or

posted on a particular station, the said work cannot be

assigned to another untrained person and if the trained

person is remaining absent the functioning of railway

working would affect tremendously. The workman

despites working as Pointsman remained absent without

following due procedure of leave for a long period of 799

days from 08/07/1994 to 23/09/1996. He never bothered to

see that he should be punctual in his attendance. The

workman was imposed penalty of removal from service

after following the procedure under R.S. (D & A) 1966 and

his appeal as well as revision application have been

dismissed by the Competent and Revisionary Authority.

5.

The workman had never given any application to

the management for extension of leave. There was no

intimation about his sickness and workman failed to

observe proper medical rules for taking leave on the ground

of sickness. Therefore workman was charge sheeted and

Inquiry Officer was appointed. The Inquiry Officer has

explained the charges to the workman. He examined the

witnesses of the management in presence of the workman.

Workman was given full opportunity to cross-examine the

witnesses of management. Copies of all the papers relied

upon were supplied to the workman. Workman cross-

examined the witnesses of management. Opportunity was

also given to the workman to lead his evidence, oral and

documentary and after hearing him and after following the

procedure, Inquiry Officer has submitted his report. Copy

of the report was sent to the workman. After giving him

hearing, the disciplinary authority has awarded the

punishment of termination, which is quite just and proper.

The inquiry was fair and proper. The findings of the I.O.

are based on the evidence on record and the punishment

of termination was proportionate to the proved

misconduct. Therefore the first party prays that reference

be dismissed with cost.

6.

The second party workman filed his rejoinder vide

Ex-12. He denied all the allegations in the written statement

and reiterated the contents in his statement of claim.

7.

Following are the preliminary issues for my

determination. I record my findings thereon for the reasons

to follow:

Sr. No. Issues

Findings

1.

Whether the inquiry is fair and

Yes.

proper?

2.

Whether the findings of the

No.

Inquiry Officer are perverse?

3.

What order?

As per

final order.

REASONS

Issue No. 1 :—

8.

In this respect the ld. adv. for the second party

submitted that the Inquiry Officer did not explain the

procedure of departmental inquiry to the workman. The

second objection is that the I.O. did not ask the workman

to appoint defence representative. Another objection is

that the first party did not produce the leave record of the

workman in the inquiry. The last objection of second party

is that the I.O. recorded the inquiry proceeding in English.

9.

The ld. adv. for the first party submitted that the

workman was served with charge sheet dt. 18/11/1996 and

domestic inquiry was initiated against him in which he

had participated. The I.O. has conducted the inquiry as

per the principles of natural justice. The second party

was given full and fair opportunity to defend himself. He

was given opportunity to cross-examine the management

witness and also permitted to adduce his evidence in the

inquiry. He was given the copies of the documents filed in

the inquiry proceeding by the first party and also allowed

to file his documents. The I.O. conducted the inquiry in

Hindi and recorded the proceedings partly in Hindi and

partly in English. The copy of Report and findings of I.O.

was sent to the workman before his dismissal.

10.

In this respect the ld. adv. for the first party pointed

out that the workman in his cross-examination (Ex- 17),

has admitted that he participated in the inquiry and the

charges were explained by the Inquiry Officer and he

understood the same. He also admitted that he did not

bring his defence representative in spite of declaration to

that effect by the first party. He also admitted that the

inquiry proceedings were recorded in his presence and

that the evidence of management witnesses was also

recorded in his presence. He further admitted in his cross

that he has cross-examined the management witnesses

and the management had offered inspection of the

documents produced in the inquiry proceeding.

11.

In this backdrop the ld. adv. for the first party

submitted that the I.O. has conducted the inquiry as per

the principles of natural justice and as per the procedure

prescribed therefor. In support of his argument the ld.

adv. resorted to Apex Court ruling in Sur Enamel and

Stamping Works Ltd. V/s. Their Workmen 1950-1967 SCLJ

1466 SC wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court laid down the

6274

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

following conditions for fair and proper domestic inquiry.

They are:

(1)

The employee proceeded against has been informed

clearly of the charges leveled against him.

(2)

The witnesses are examined-ordinarily in the

presence of the employee in respect of the charges

(3)

The employee is given a fair opportunity to cross

examine witnesses.

(4)

He is given a fair opportunity to examine witnesses

including himself in his defence if he so wishes on

any relevant matter and

(5)

The Inquiry Officer records his findings with reasons

for the same in his report.

12.

In the light of guidelines of the Apex Court all the

points were complied with by the Inquiry Officer i.e. the

inquiry was conducted in presence of the workman. Copies

of all the documents produced in the inquiry proceeding

were given to him. He was given opportunity to cross

examine the management witnesses. The ld. adv. for the

workman has further submitted that, management neither

produced the leave record of the workman nor given copies

thereof to him. On the point it is rightly submitted on

behalf of the first party that, the fact is not disputed that

the workman was unauthorisedly absent from 18/07/1994

to 23/09/1996. Neither there was dispute of balance leave

nor leave account was necessary in the inquiry proceeding.

Therefore question of producing leave record or giving

copies thereof to the workman does not arise. The fact is

not disputed that copies of all the documents produced in

the inquiry proceeding were supplied to the workman.

13.

In respect of recording of proceeding in English it

was rightly pointed out by the ld. adv. for the first party

that the inquiry was conducted in Hindi, the language

known to the workman and the proceeding thereof was

recorded in English. Therefore it cannot be called illegal

or improper. On the point Bombay High Court ruling can

be resorted to in National Organic Chemicals Ltd. & Ors.

V/s. Pandit Ladaku Patil 2008 III CLR 716 wherein the

inquiry was conducted in Marathi and the evidence was

recorded in English. The Hon’ble Court held that, the

inquiry cannot be quashed for following such a procedure

of recording evidence in English. In the circumstances I

come to the conclusion that the inquiry was fair and proper.

Accordingly I decide this issue No.1 in the affirmative.

Issue No. 2 :—

14.

In respect of the findings of the Inquiry Officer it is

vaguely contended that they are perverse. However details

thereof are not given as to how they are perverse. On the

other hand the findings of the I.O. are found to be in

consonance with the evidence on record i.e. the workman

was absent from 18/7/1994 to 23/09/1996 and neither he

had obtained leave nor applied therefor. In short findings

are based on the evidence on record. Thus I hold that the

findings of the I.O. are not perverse. Accordingly I decide

this issue No. 2 in the negative and proceed to pass the

following order:

ORDER

(i)

The inquiry is held fair and proper.

(ii)

Findings of the Inquiry Officer are not perverse.

(iii)

The parties are directed to argue/lead evidence on

the point of quantum of punishment.

Date: 21/07/2014

K. B. KATAKE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2472-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fMikVZesaV vkWiQ

VsyhdE;wfuds'ku ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa

ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@337@99) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;

ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&40012@278@99&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014

S.O. 2472.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/

LC/R/337/99) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in

the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the

employers in relation to the management of the Department

of Telecommunication and their workmean, which was

received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-40012/278/99-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRLAL TRLBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/337/99

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE

Shri Jagdishchandra Rathore,

S/o Aathmaram Rathore,

Vill. Nenavath,

Tehsil Tarana,

Distt. Ujjain

.....Workman

Versus

Chief General Manager,

Deptt. of Telecommunication,

Hoshangabad Road,

MP Circle,

Bhopal (MP)

.....Management

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6275

AWARD

Passed on this 22nd day of August, 2014

1.

As per letter dated 19-11-99 by the Government of

India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is

received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under

Section-10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification

No. L-40012/278/99-IR(DU) The dispute under reference

relates to :

“Whether the action of the management of Chief

General Manager Telecom and their workman Shri

Jagdishchandra Rathore S/o Aathmaram Rathore

w.e.f. 26-3-99 is legal and justified? If not, to what

relief the workman is entitled?”

2.

After receiving reference, notices were issued to the

parties. 1st party workman submitted statement of claim at

Page 2/1 to 2/4. Case of workman is that he was engaged as

labour by IInd party No. 4 from November, 1989. IInd party

No. 3 is authority for sanctioning payment of salary and

allowances. IInd party No. 2 is controlling authority. IInd

No. 1 is implementing the policy. Workman was engaged

as casual labour as large number of casual labours were

engaged by IInd party on daily wages. Their services were

not regularized. Petition was filed in statement of claim.

Hon’ble Apex Court had given directions for framing

scheme for regularization for casual employees. It is

submitted that workman was continuously working from

7-11-1989 as his services were not regularized as per scheme

for regularization of casual employees, the casual employee

working as on 30-3-85 was entitled for regularization of his

services. Workman was not given its benefit. His services

were terminated on 31-3-99 without any notice or without

paying retrenchment compensation, termination of his

service is in violation of Section 25 of I.D. Act. Workman

had completed 240 days continuous service. Oral

termination of his services is illegal. That workman was

paid Rs. 1500 per month. He was not paid regular pay scale.

IInd party exploited workman. On such ground workman is

praying for his regularization and reinstatement with

consequential benefits.

3.

IInd party initially filed written Statement at Page 3/1

to 3/2 signed only by the counsel for management. Written

Statement duly verified is filed by management on 22-3-13.

Claim of workman is totally denied. As per management.

Workman was not appointed as casual labour from

November, 1989 by Sub-Divisional Engineer. That workman

did not work with IInd party. There was no question of

termination of his service. There was no question of issuing

notice or payment of retrenchment compensation. Workman

not worked for 240 days in any of the calendar years. There

was no question of retrenchment of his service. Workman

never worked in the Sub-division. There was no question

of regularization of his service. On such ground, IInd party

prays that reference is answered in favour of management.

4.

Considering pleadings on record, the points which

arise for my consideration and determination are as under.

My findings are recorded against each of them for the

reasons as below :—

(i)

Whether the action of the manage-

In Negative

ment of Chief General

Manager Telecom and their work-

man Shri Jagdishchandra Rathore

S/o Aathmaram Rathore w.e.f. 26-3-99

is legal and justified?

(ii) If not, what relief the

As per final

workman is entitled to?”

order.

REASONS

5.

Terms of reference relates to action taken by

management against workman from 26-3-99, some word is

missing. In his statement of claim, workman has pleaded

that his services were terminated by IInd party from 31-3-

99. IInd party had denied all material contentions of

workman. Workman filed affidavit of his evidence

contending that his services were terminated in 1999. He

was not paid retrenchment compensation. He was

continuously working 1987 to 1999. He completed 240 days

continuous service. His services were terminated in

violation of Section 25 H, G of I.D.Act. In his cross-

examination, workman says his affidavit is drafted in English

and not in Hindi. Some mistake was committed. He has

stated in his affidavit that he was working till 1998 again

says 1999 . Workman again corrected that he was working

with Ilnd party till 1990. Management’s witness Deewakar

Jain in his affidavit of evidence says that as per record

available workman was never engaged by management.

The claim for regularization of workman is baseless. In his

cross-examination, management’s witness says that at

Sohagpur office, record of casual mazdoor was maintained.

Again he corrected that he doesnot know whether record

of casual mazdoor was maintained in said office.

Management’s witness in his further cross-examination

says he doesnot know whether at the time in question,

casual mazdoors were engaged by the department of IInd

party. The witness of management is working on the post

of SDE Legal. He looks after cases of the department. He

has no knowledge of casual labours engaged in department

during 1990 to 1991.

6.

1st party had given application for production of

documents dated 26-6-03. IInd party did not produce

documents as per said application. Despite of time

requested for production of documents, as per the orders,

the evidence of workman and management’s witness is

carefully appreciated. Management’s witness has no

knowledge about casual employees engaged in the

department. On application submitted by workman for

production of documents, the documents are not produced

by management. The material documents are withheld by

6276

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

the management. Under such set of facts, the evidence of

workman deserves to be accepted instead of the evidence

of management’s witness. The evidence of workman is clear

that his services were terminated without notice, he was

not paid retrenchment, he was continuously working since

November 1989 till 31-3-99. Therefore termination of service

of workman is illegal. For above reasons, I record my finding

in Point No.l in Negative.

7.

Point No.2- In view of my finding in Point No.l,

termination of service of workman is in violation of Section

25-F of I.D. Act, question arises whether workman is entitled

for reinstatement. As per pleadings of the workman, he

was not working in 1985 therefore workman is not entitled

for benefits of scheme for regularization of casual

employees. Considering length of service rendered by

workman reasonable compensation deserves to be

awarded. Compensation Rs. One Lakh would be

reasonable. Accordingly I record my finding in Point No. l.

8.

In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1)

The action of the management of Chief Geneal

Manager Telecom and their workman Shri

Jagdishchandra Rathore S/o Aathmaram Rathore

w.e.f. 26-3-99 is not legal.

(2)

IInd party is directed to pay compensation Rs. One

Lakh to the workman within 30 days from the date of

publication of award.

Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman

within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In

case of default, amount shall carry 9% interest per annum

from the date of award till its realization.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2473-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fMikVZesaV vkWiQ

VsyhdE;wfuds'ku ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa

ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ

la[;k lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@192@93) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks

dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&40012@80@92&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014

S.O. 2473.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/

LC/R/192/93) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in

the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the

employers in relation to the management of Department

of Telecommunication and their workman, which was

received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-40012/80/92-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/192/93

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE

Shri Beduram,

S/o Shri Tanguram,

Sakin Pandaria,

Tehsil Takhatpur,

Distt. Bilaspur

.....Workman

Versus

Divisional Officer (Telegraphs),

Department of Telecommunication,

PO & Distt. Bilaspur

.....Management

AWARD

Passed on this 14th day of August, 2014

1.

As per letter dated 17-9-93 by the Government of

India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is

received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under

Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-40012/

80/92-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:

“Whether the action of the management of SDO

(Telegraphs) Bilaspur in retrenching Shri Bedu Ram,

S/o Shri Tangu Ram w.e.f.10-10-90 is justified? If not,

to what relief he is entitled to?”

2.

After receiving reference, notices were issued to

the parties. Workman submitted statement of claim at page

2/1 to 2/3. Case of workman is that he was employed with

IInd party from 17-9-81 to 15-10-90. He was continuously

working as casual labour. His services were terminated

without enquiry. He further submits that termination of

his service was on the ground of unauthorized officers for

more than six months i.e. January, 1985 to May, 1988 the

period of 3 years 6 months. One month’s notice pay Rs.1035

and Rs.517 as retrenchment compensation were paid.

Workman further submits that DO letter of General

Manager dated 12-1-90 is clear that workman completed

240 days continuous service becomes ordinary mazdoor/

confirmed. The reasons assigned in termination order is

not sustainable. Workman was not absent. He was working

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6277

with IInd party. Workman instead of regularization was

terminated from service. That termination of his service is

in violation of Section 25-H of I.D. Act and the provisions

of Contract Labour (R&A)Act 1970. On such ground,

workman is praying for reinstatement with consequential

benefits.

3.

Further statement of claim is submitted by workman

at Page 6/1 to 6/2 reiterating his contentions about his

appointment, that provisions of Section 25 N are applicable.

4.

IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 9/1 to 9/3.

Relief claimed by workman is denied. IInd party has shown

working days of workman from 1981 to 1990, 1991. It is

submitted that the workman did not worked continuously.

He remained unauthorized absent therefore one month’s

pay was paid to him in lieu of notice and his services were

dispensed with.

5.

It is reiterated that for unauthorised absence from

duty, services of workman were dispensed. Workman did

not continuously worked for 240 days during 1989-90.

Workman cannot claim status of regular employee. That

the workman was engaged purely on temporary basis. He

is not entitled to the relief claimed by him. There was no

question of giving artificial break to the workman.

6.

Considering pleadings on record, the points which

arise for my consideration and determination are as under.

My findings are recorded against each of them for the

reasons as below:-

(i)

Whether the action of the manage-

In Affirmative

ment of SDO(Telegraphs) Bilaspur

in retrenching Shri Bedu Ram,

S/o Shri Tangu Ram w.e.f.10-10-90

is justified?

(ii) If not, what relief the workman is

Workman is not

entitled to?”

entitled to any

relief.

REASONS

7.

Workman is challenging termination of his service

on the ground that he was terminated for unauthorized

absence without holding enquiry. He was paid one months

pay and retrenchment compensation.

8.

Workman filed affidavit of his evidence covering

above contentions in statement of claim. However workman

failed to appear for his cross-examination. Evidence of

workman was closed on 24-8-09. As workman failed to

appear for his cross-examination, his evidence cannot be

accepted.

9.

Management filed affidavit of witness Shri I.S.Xalxo

supporting contentions of management. Evidence of

management’s witness remained unchallenged. Workman

failed to cross-examine the management’s witness.

evidence of workman cannot be accepted as he failed to

appear for cross-examination. Evidence of management’s

witness remained unchallenged. I find no reason to discard

his evidence therefore the contentions of workman cannot

be accepted. For above reasons, I record my finding in

Point No.1 in Affirmative.

10.

In the result, award is passed as under :—

(1)

The action of the management of SDO(Telegraphs)

Bilaspur in retrenching Shri Bedu Ram, S/o Shri Tangu

Ram w.e.f.10-10-90 is proper and legal.

(2)

Workman is not entitled to any relief.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2474-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fMikVZesaV vkWiQ

VsyhdE;wfuds'ku ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa

ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k] tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@

,ylh@vkj@102@05) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks

8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&40012@45@2005&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014

S.O. 2474.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/

LC/R/102/05) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the

Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers

in relation to the management of Department of

Telecommunication and their workmen, which was received

by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-40012/45/2005-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/102/05

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE

Shri Rakesh Patel,

S/o Shri Pyarelal Patel,

Telephone Exchange,

Shahdol

.....Workman

Versus

Chief General Manager,

Deptt. of Telecommunication,

BSNL Hoshangabad, MP Circle,

Bhopal (MP)

.....Management

6278

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

AWARD

Passed on this 1st day of August 2014

1.

As per letter dated 26-9-05 by the Government of

India, Ministry Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received.

The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of

I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-40012/45/2005-

IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to :

“Whether the action of the TDE, Telecom, Mandla

in terminating the services of Shri Rakesh Kumar

Patel instead of regularizing him (as he completed

240 days) and not complying provisions of Industrial

Dispute Act, 1947 is legal and justified? If not, to

what relief the concerned workman is entitled?”

2.

After receiving reference, notices were issued to the

parties. 1st party workman submitted his statement of claim.

Case of 1st party workman is that he was initially appointed

on 1-6-85 by IInd party. He continuously worked till

1-12-1990. It is submitted that instead of regularizing his

services, IInd party arbitrarily terminated his services from

1-12-90. That workman had completed 240 days continuous

service. His termination without assigning reason amounts

to retrenchment under Section 2(oo) of I.D.Act. His services

are terminated in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act is

illegal. Workman submits that from 1-6-85 to 1-12-90, he

was continuously working. He acquired status of employee

under Section 25 B of I.D. Act. It is reiterated that his services

are terminated without notice, without paying retrenchment

compensation in violation of Section 25 of I.D. Act. On

such ground, he prays for reinstatement with back wages.

3.

IInd party filed Written Statement opposing claim of

workman. IInd party submits that workman has not

completed 240 days. His name is not recorded in muster

roll. Management did not appoint workman. There was no

question of his regularization or termination. It is reiterated

that as workman has not completed 240 days continuous

service, there was no question of violation of provisions

of I.D.Act. Workman is not covered under Section 25 B of

I.D.Act, the contentions of workman are false. Workman

doesot come within the aspect and scheme of judgment of

Supreme Court dated 27-10-87. On such ground, IInd party

prays for rejection of claim.

4.

Considering pleadings on record, the points which

arise for my consideration and determination are as under.

My findings are recorded against each of them for the

reasons as below :

(i)

Whether the action of the TDE,

In Affirmative

Telecom, Mandla in terminating

the services of Shri Rakesh Kumar

Patel instead of regularizing him

(as he completed 240 days) and

not complying provisions of

Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is

legal and justified?

(ii) If not, what relief the workman is

Workman is not

entitled to?”

entitled to any

relief.

REASONS

5 .

Workman is challenging termination of his service

for violation of Section 25-F of I.D. Act contending that he

completed 240 days continuous service. In support of his

claim, workman filed affidavit. However he failed to appear

for his cross-examination. Evidence of workman was closed

on 3-8-2012.

6.

Management filed affidavit of evidence of witness

Shri A.K. Sahu. workman failed to participate and cross-

examine the witness of management. Thus the claim of

workman is not supported by evidence. Evidence of

management’s witness remained unchallenged, I find no

reason to discard his evidence.

7.

Learned counsel for workman relies on ratio held in

case of Shamsuddin versus State of MP reported in 2007(III)

MPWN 111. In case of Batala Coop. sugar Mills Ltd. Versus

Sowaran Singh reported in 2005(8) Supreme Court Cases

481. In fact the claim of Ist party is supported by evidence,

detailed discussion of ratio held in all those cases is not

necessary. For absence of evidence, I record my finding in

Point No.1 in Affirmative.

8.

In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1)

The action of the TDE, Telecom, Mandla in

terminating the services of Shri Rakesh Kumar Patel

instead of regularizing him is legal and proper.

(2)

Workman is not entitled to any relief.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2475-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vflLVsaV

lqifjUVsUMsUV] VsyhxzkiQ VªSfiQd] fcykliqj izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa

vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ

la[;k lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@142@93) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks

dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&40012@122@92&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014

S.O. 2475.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/

LC/R/142/93) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in

the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the

employers in relation to the management of Asstt. Suptd.,

Telegraph Traffic, Bilaspur and their workmen, received

by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-40012/122/92-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6279

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/142/93

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R .B. PATLE

Shri Itwari Prasad Gond,

C/o Shri Shivlal Gond,

Gram. Kisan Parsada,

Post Jhairam Nagar,

Distt. Bilaspur

....Workman

Versus

Asstt. Suptd.,

Telegraph Traffic,

D.F.O.

PO & Distt. Bilaspur

.....Management

AWARD

Passed on this 30th day of July 2014

1.

As per letter dated 21-7-93 by the Government of

India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is

received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under

Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-40012/

122/92-IRDU. The dispute under reference relates to:

“Whether the action of the management of Asstt.

Suptd. Telegraph Traffic, DTO Bilaspur in

terminating the services of Shri Itwari Prasad Gond,

S/o Shri shivlal Gond w.e.f. 7-8-90 is justified? If not,

what relief he is entitled to?”

2.

After receiving reference, notices were issued to

the parties. Workman submitted statement of claim at Page

3/1 to 3/2. Case of workman is that he was appointed as

telegraph man in Telegraph office, Bilaspur. On 13-2-85, he

was continuously working in D.T.O, Bilaspur upto 7-8-90.

He was terminated without notice. He was not paid

retrenchment compensation. He had worked 125 days in

1985, 337 days in 1986, 336 days in 1987, 317 days in 1988,

349 days in 1989, 223 days in 1990 & 103 days in 1991.

Workman submits that termination of his service is in

violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. On such ground, he

prays for reinstatement with back wages.

3.

IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 6/1 to 6/2.

IInd party submits that workman has not depicted correct

picture. The false ground are shown. Workman was

employed as casual labour who could be given the work

of telegraph in absence of telegraph man or delivery man,

if such work was available. He was paid wages Rs. 28.25

per day. It is denied that as per instructions dated 12-1-90,

it was not possible to provide status of casual labour to

the Ist party. The working days is shown in statement of

claim of Ist party during 1985 to 1991. It is admitted to be

correct. IInd party however denies that termination of his

service is in violation of Section 25-F of I.D. Act. IInd

party prays for rejection of claim.

4.

Workman filed rejoinder at Page 7/1 to 7/3 reiterating

its contentions in statement of claim. That he was

discharging work of telegraph man and not as casual

labour. Workman was delivering telegram and he was

assured monthly salaries. He continuously worked during

1985 to 1991. His services are terminated without notice.

Workman prays for his reinstatement.

5.

Considering pleadings on record, the points which

arise for my consideration and determination are as under.

My findings are recorded against each of them for the

reasons as below:-

(i)

Whether the action of the manage-

In Negative

ment of Whether the action of the

management of Asstt. Suptd. Telegraph

Traffic, DTO Bilaspur in terminating the

services of Shri Itwari Prasad Gond,

S/o Shri shivlal Gond w.e.f. 7-8-90 is

justified?

(ii) If not, what relief the workman is

As per final

entitled to?”

order.

REASONS

6.

Workman is challenging termination of his service

from 7-8-90 for violation of Section 25-F. that he was

continuously working from 1985 to 1991. The working days

given in para-3 of statement of claim are admitted by IInd

party. Workman filed affidavit of his evidence. The working

days are shown in para-3 of affidavit. Working days of

workman during 1986 to 1989 are shown more than 240

days. The services of workman were terminated without

notice. The documents Exhibit W-4 shows workman was

continuously working from 1-8-85 to 1-1-1990 without any

break. Thus the evidence of workman is supported that he

completed more than 240 days continuous service during

above period. In his cross-examination, workman denies

that he was engaged as casual labour. He also denies that

after appointment of permanent employee, his services

were terminated. The evidence of management’s witness

Shri M.R. Dhurv is on the point that workman was engaged

on casual basis as deliveryman in absence of permanent

incumbent on wages Rs. 28.25 per day. Workman had not

completed 240 days continuous service. Management’s

witness in his cross-examination says as per the

department’s letter he says that workman was engaged as

casual labour. Said letter is produced on record. Letter

was issued by Shri R.P.Srivastava, Divisional Engineer

Exhibit M-1. Management’s witness further says that

any document was not found , that workman worked for

more than 240 days during an year. When working days

are admitted in Written Statement filed by workman, the

evidence of management’s witness contrary to it cannot

be accepted. The evidence shows workman worked more

6280

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

than 240 days during 1985 to 1990. His services were

terminated without notice in violation of section 25-F of

I.D.Act. Therefore I record my finding in Point No.1 in

Negative.

7.

Point No. 2 Termination of workman is in violation

of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. his services were terminated

long back in 1991. Workman was working since 1985 to

1991. Considering length of service, workman cannot be

allowed reinstatement with full back wages. Termination

in violation of Section 25-F would justify reasonable

compensation to the workman. In my considered view,

compensation Rs.1,50,000/- would be appropriate in the

matter. Accordingly I record my finding in Point No.2.

8.

In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1)

The action of the management of Asstt. Suptd.

Telegraph Traffic, DTO Bilaspur in terminating the

services of Shri Itwari Prasad Gond, S/o Shri shivlal

Gond w.e.f. 7-8-90 is proper and legal.

(2)

IInd party is directed to pay compensation

Rs.1,50,000/- to the workman Shri Itwari Prasad Gond.

Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman

within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In

case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum

from the date of award till its realization.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2476-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj xu dSfjt

iSQDVªh] tcyiqj ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa

ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@

,ylh@vkj@39@90) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks

8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&14012@19@89&Mh&2 (ch)º

ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014

S.O. 2476.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/

LC/R/39/90) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-

cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure

in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation

to the management of Gun Carriage Factory, Jabalpur and

their workmen, received by the Central Government on

08/09/2014.

[No. L-14012/19/89-D-2 (B)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/39/90

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE

Shri K.Dutta,

Vice President,

GCF Labour Union,

Q.No.489, Byoharbagh,

Jabalpur (MP)

.....Workman

Versus

General Manager,

Gun Carriage Factory,

Jabalpur

....Management

AWARD

Passed on this 30th day of July 2014

1.

As per letter dated 31-1-90 by the Government of

India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is

received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under

Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-14012/

19/89-D-2(B). The dispute under reference relates to:

“Whether the action of the management of Gun

Carriage Factory, Jabalpur in compulsory retiring

Shri K.Dutta, Ex.Labour, GCF w.e.f. 21-1-1988 is legal

and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is

entitled to?”

2.

After receiving reference, notices were issued to

the parties. Ist party workman filed statement of claim at

Page 3/1 to 3/11. Case of workman is that the penalty of

removal from service by Chairman Ordnance Factory,

Calcutta modified to compulsory retirement as per order

dated 22-1-88 is illegal. Workman submits details of his

service. He was selected as Artisan Training in the year

1963. After 4 ½ years training including one year journey

manship at Gun and Shell Factory, he was appointed as

Turner A Grade. In 1968 he was transferred to GCF by the

Director General, Ordnance Factory, Calcutta. In 1973, he

was promoted on the post of Supervisor Grade B. workman

further submits that he was active member of Trade Union

during 1971 to 1974. Workman was President, General

Secretary of union, GCF Mazdoor Sangh. Union was

holding majority of seats in Committee during 1974 to 1978,

1980 during his tenure. That he raised grievances of the

employees in the matters of work system, promotion policy

activities, corruption etc. suddenly he was transferred to

Abadi, Madras in 1977. He also submits that he was placed

under suspension on false charges. The suspension was

continued for 20 months even after completion of enquiry.

Workman says that he was victimized by the management.

Because of his Union activities, he was suspended time to

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6281

time by General Manager Shri Narashhimhan. That in

August 1981 at instance of General Manager Shri

Narashhimhan, new General Manager directed to issue

chargesheet against him on fabricated charges. That the

charges pertained to LTC advance in 1974. Chargesheet

was issued after more than 7 years. It suffered from latches.

Even after issuing chargesheet, enquiry was conducted

after 5 years diminishing the chance of defence.

Departmental enquiry was started after 5 years in 1986.

More than 9 Defence witness retired or expired, some of

them transferred from Jabalpur. Several important

documents requested by him were not produced. On many

occasions, further cross-examination of management’s

witnesses was stopped for absence of documents or its

production. Workman says that he had applied for

appointment of legal practitioners for his defence. His

application was not allowed. Enquiry was conducted in

violation of principles of natural justice. Workman further

submits that the documents were not proved by examining

any witnesses. His signatures on his application for

advance of LTC was not proved. Handwriting expert was

not appointed. He was not provided copy of documents

to enable him to take proper defence. Workman had called

for several documents. His request was not allowed. The

witnesses submitted for his defence were not called.

Several witnesses were not examined. Out of 5 witnesses

of management, 3 witnesses denied their statements.

Findings of Enquiry officer are perverse not supported by

cogent evidence. Enquiry Officer not followed the rules of

proving of documents. Mere production of documents

cannot be said proved. On such contentions, workman

has submitted that enquiry conducted against him is in

violation of the procedure of principles of natural justice,

finding is perverse. On such ground, workman prays for

his reinstatement with back wages.

3.

IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 6/1 to 6/3.

IInd party submits that on basis of report of false LTC

claim by the workman, CBI officials visited his house for

investigation. The report of false claim of LTC during the

year 1974 by workman T.No.1054/NIE Supervisor B WIS

GCF Jabalpur was received. Workman was issued

memorandum under Rule 14 of CCS(CCA)Rules 1964.

Workman was appointed as Turner A after completion of

4 ½ years training. He was posted in GCF Jabalpur and

later promoted as Supervisor B. The articles of charges

against workman was while working as supervisor in W-I

Section, he failed to maintain absolute integrity and

committed gross misconduct. He claimed false LTC Bill

dated 30-9-74 amounting to Rs.100.60 for himself and his

wife for Jabalpur to Hawda. That T.No. 27456 & 27457

were reserved in name of Shri Sen Gupta and Mrs. S.Ghosh

and for return journey said workman quoted ticket No.

1267 & 1271. When he could not have performed the said

journey with his wife as the workman was not married at

that time. He gressly contravened Rule 3(i) of CCS Conduct

Rules 1965. The chargesheet was issued to workman. He

did not accept the allegations. Enquiry Officer

M.Venkataraman was appointed. Mr. S.N.Saxena was

appointed as Presenting Officer. On transfer of Shri

M.Venkataraman, Shri B.K. Sharma GCF Manager was

appointed as Enqiry officer. On his transfer Mr. U.C.Saxena

was appointed as Enquiry Officer and Shri A.Srinivasan

as Presenting Officer.

4.

IInd party submits that workman was not married at

relevant time. The enquiry was conducted as per rules.

Punishment of removal was imposed against workman.

Considering the evidence and gravity of proved charges,

IInd party prays for rejection o claim.

5.

Workman filed rejoinder at page 9/1 to 9/3 reiterating

its contentions in Statement of claim. That the enquiry

was not properly conducted, he was not supplied

documents. The witnesses were not called for his defence.

All other adverse contentions of IInd party has been

denied.

6.

As per order dated 12-12-2001 my predecessor

dealing with preliminary issue regarding validity of DE

conducted against workman held workman admitted in

his application dated 7-9-01 that DE conducted in proper

manner. In view of this admission, it is held that the

Departmental enquiry was conducted against the workman

in a just and proper manner. Management was not required

to lead evidence to prove alleged misconduct of workman.

7.

The award was passed by my learned predecessor

on 18-2-02 against management and in favour of workman.

Order of compulsory retirement dated 22-1-88 passed by

management was quashed. Workman was directed to

reinstatement with back wages with consequential benefits

of his post, continuity of service was also allowed.

8.

Above award passed by my predecessor was

challenged by management filing Writ Petition No. 3400/

2002. Hon’ble High Court allowed Writ Petition and award

was set aside. The matter is remanded for re-deciding afresh

according to law allowing parties to adduce evidence as

per judgment dated 11-5-06.

9.

After remand of the matter, my predecessor framed

issue on 10-7-07. Issue No.1 is whether DE conducted by

management against workman is proper and legal. If not,

whether the management be permitted to prove the

misconduct. (2) To what relief the workman is entitled ?

10.

At the time of argument, it was emphasized by

workman Shri K.Dutta that Hon’ble High Court has

quashed the award the matter needs to be decided on

merit including the point whether enquiry conducted

against workman is legal? Considering above aspects and

submissions advanced, points which arise for my

consideration and determination are as under. My findings

are recorded against each of them for the reasons as

below:-

6282

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(i)

Whether enquiry conducted

In Affirmative

against workman is legal and

proper?

(ii) Whether the misconduct alleged

Not proved

against workman are proved from

evidence in Enquiry proceedings?

(iii) Whether the punishment of

In Negative

compulsory retirement imposed by

Appellate Authority is proper and

legal?

(iv) If not, what relief the workman is

As per final

entitled to?”

order.

REASONS

11.

Point No.1- Enquiry conducted against workman

was found proper and legal by my predecessor as per

order sheet dated 12-12-2001. The application dated

7-9-01 was submitted by the workman admitting that the

DE conducted against workman is in proper manner.

Workman filed affidavit of evidence dated 30-8-07. Affidavit

is silent w.r.t. above point that workman had submitted

application admitting enquiry conducted against him was

proper. The award passed by my predecessor was

challenged in Writ Petition no.3400/2002 by the

management. The reading of the judgment by Hon’ble

High Court in above Writ petition shows that the enquiry

conducted against workman was found legal by my

predecessor was not challenged by the management. The

award was challenged mainly on the ground that by

allowing claim of workman, it was observed that documents

relating to LTC were not proved as such charges could

not be proved. Hon’ble high Court said that zerox copies

of such documents were produced on record. Therefore

the matter was remanded back to decide the matter. The

workman has submitted exhaustive note of argument, his

notes are silent about the order dated 12-12-2001 by my

predecessor observing that workman admitted in his

application dated 7-9-01 DE conducted against him was in

proper manner. Workman himself admits that enquiry

conducted against him was proper. The Hon’ble High Court

has not specifically set aside said finding. Only the

directions are given to re-decide the matter. I donot find

any reason to take different view for deciding legality

conducted against workman. The application was

submitted by workman admitting enquiry was properly

conducted. Therefore I record my finding on Point No.1 in

Affirmative.

12.

Point No. 2, 3- In view of my finding on Point No.1

as applicant had admitted enquiry conducted against him

as proper, the question remains for decision is whether

the charges of misconduct alleged against workman are

proved from evidence in Enquiry Proceedings, whether

the punishment of compulsory retirement is proper and

legal. Workman has filed affidavit of his evidence at Page

32/1 to 32/9. His affidavit is devoted that enquiry conducted

against him was not proper, his defence was prejudice.

Document 8 to 11 were in custody of Enquiry Officer. List

of 16 witnesses was submitted. Workman was denied

opportunity to cross-examine the witness was prejudiced.

The evidence of workman remained unchallenged.

Workman was not cross-examined by management.

Management filed affidavit of evidence of its witness

Chumdemo Ngullie. He has stated that workman availed

15 days leave and availed LTC to his hometown for self

and wife for the block year 1972-73. That enquiry was

conducted by Shri Saxena. Workman was found not fit for

service and punishment of dismissal was imposed against

him. The evidence in cross-examination of management’s

witness shows management’s witness is posted from 2012.

He has no personal knowledge about the workman. He

submitted affidavit on the basis of documents.

Management’s witness did not give reply as to who was

appointing authority of workman in 1981. The witness of

management was unable to tell whether Director General

of Ordnance Factory was appointing authority for the post

of supervisor. He was unable to tell whether chargesheet

issued against workman was drafted by other agencies.

To be precise the evidence of management’s witness is

hearsay. The legal position is settled when enquiry is

found legal, only evidence in Enquiry proceedings needs

to be considered for deciding whether the charges are

proved. Unless enquiry is vitiated or found illegal, no

evidence is produced to prove misconduct alleged against

workman. In view of above, only evidence in Enquiry

proceedings needs to be considered in order to decide

whether charges against workman are proved. Exhaustive

written notes of argument is submitted by workman also

stating ratio held in various cases. However those many

citations are not submitted for my perusal. The notes of

argument are more in academic nature. There is no dispute

that only six witnesses are examined in the Enquiry

proceedings. Evidence of MW-1 Shri Kosta is from page

173 to 187. He appears to be the star witness in the Enquiry

Proceedings. His evidence shows that he had received

application for LTC advance dated 10-1-1974, GCF form

No. 642, surety is given by R.P.Vishwakarma, leave

application of Shri K.Dutta dated 27-12-73, order dated

7-1-74 permitting Shri K.Dutta for availing LTC, LTC

Advance Bill dated 11-1-74, Final LTC Claim Bill No. 7656-

dated 30-9-74 for Rs.32.60. It was forwarded to the cash

office for payment. That he sent two certificates alongwith

final claim. One certificate related to certifying the details

of the family performing the journey and the destination

of journey. Second certificate relates to the details of

factory order for onward and return journey which is signed

by the Administrative Officer concerned. In reply to Q.6,

he says the amount of Rs.68/- only. In his further evidence,

MW-I says those documents and statement of Shri Kosta

given during preliminary enquiry was examined by the

Defence Counsel. In his cross-examination Mr. Kosta says

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6283

he had given statement on 3-10-79. No one asked him to

give statement. The statement was recorded in GCF factory.

The statement was given in duty hours. He had given

statement at the place of duty, no third person was there.

His boss Shri Shukla told him to go and give statement.

Any one was not present and his statement was given. He

write his statement by hand. He was not shown

handwritten statement. In reply to Q.17, MW-1 Kosta says

he did not tally list of dependents and hometown of the

delinquent. It was done by the establishment section. In

reply to Q.23, MW-I claims ignorance about any proof but

it was true copy of the statement given before CBI

Inspector. In reply to Q.27, after seeing Exhibit P-5 he says

he filed Exhibit P-5 seeing Exhibit P-1- application for

advance. That the block year was ascertained by seeing

application. The witness admits that application for

advance of LTC was received on 10-1-1974. In reply to

Q.31, witness says application for advance was received

in the office by time keeper and time keeper gave to

incharge. Incharge gave it to concerned man. Sometimes

application is brought by the individual himself. The entire

evidence of MW-I Kosta doesnot show that application

for advance was signed by delinquent in his presence.

The delinquent has mentioned about his wife in the

application.

13.

Further cross-examination of witness No. 1 Kosta

as LDC working in preparation of LTC Bill, it was his duty

to compile the application and bills to kept in one place.

Inspector CBI was asking question from him and he was

replying the question. The same was written by him on

piece of paper. The statement recorded by CBI Officer is

not seen in Enquiry Proceedings. In reply to Q.39, he says

application for NIEs in question (Exhibit P-1) not filled by

him but P-5 is 100 % filled by him. In reply to Q.40, he says

in the application portion, he was taking the signature

after preparing the bill from the applicant. In case he fails

to write is designation etc, the same is completed by him

according to Exhibit P-1. In reply to Q.41, he says he himself

filled Form P-6. In reply to Q.42, he says that it was not his

duty to fill the bills. If whole evidence of MW-I is

considered, it doesnot clearly spell that documents Exhibit

P-1 to P-6 were filled by workman himself claiming LTC for

his wife. There is no dispute that at the relevant time,

workman was not marked. MW-I had verified information

from service book. There was no entry of wife as relative

of workman.

14.

So far as evidence of statement of management

witness No.2 is concerned, in his cross-examination reply

to Q.2, he says apart from checking those address and

block year, he had not checked depends of the delinquent.

In reply to Qr.3, he was unable to tell as to which authority

used to change the list of witnesses for LTC in case of

NIEs.

15.

Management’s witness No.3 in his evidence says

that he was engaged in leave application group. He was

doing registration of leave application of all NIEs in

E(T)Section. In his further statement in reply to Q.2, he

says Shri K.Dutta has applied for leave for 15 days from

after checking leave position from leave record, his leave

was booked as 9 days EL and 6 days Leave without pay.

His evidence has absolutely no bearing to claim LTC

benefit by delinquent for his wife. The statement of

management witness No.4 Gangaram Yadav is on the point

that delinquent was residing at his house 5-6 years back.

His further evidence shows that any lady were not residing

with him. The statement of witness No.5 Ramdas Yadav is

on the point that 7-8 persons including Shri Pathak were

residing in his house. His evidence has absolutely no

bearing to the claim of LTC by delinquent for his wife. The

statement of witness No.6 Shri N.L.Khadse, CBI Inspector

is on the point that he recorded the statements. Those

statements are not produced on record. The statements of

any of the witnesses of the management are silent that the

application for LTC benefit for his wife by delinquent was

signed by delinquent in their presence. The relevant

contents about family members, wife was written by

workman. In absence of such evidence, statement recorded

by management witness No.6 not produced on record.

The evidence is unsafe to place reliance. Evidence of

management’s witness is not cogent to prove the charges

against workman. The documents produced by IInd party

management are zerox copies P-1 to P-6 is not produced is

a mystery.

16.

Learned counsel for management Shri P.Shankaran

relies on ratio held in

Case of Uptron India Ltd. Versus Ammi Bhan reported

in AIR 1998-SC-1681. Their Lordship wrong concession

on question of law made by counsel is not binding on his

client. Such concession cannot constitute a just ground

for a binding precedent.

In case of Syed Rahimuddin versus Director General

CSIR reported in AIR 2001-SC-2418. Their Lordship dealing

with compliance of natural justice.

The ratio needs no discussion as the workman has

admitted by submitting application dated 7-9-01 that

enquiry conducted against him is proper. For the same

reasons, ratio held in case of AIR-1996-SC-492 &

2002(1)MPLJ-435 cannot be applied to present case.

17.

The evidence discussed on record of management

witnesses is not cogent, clear that the delinquent himself

had claimed LTC benefit for his wife. When the claim for

LTC Bill as processed from office, it could have been

immediately noticed that workman was unmarried at

relevant time. The office could have raised objection but

nothing of this sort was done by the IInd party. Charges

of misconduct alleged against workman cannot be proved

from evidence proceeding. Therefore punishment of

removal from service reduced to compulsory retirement

6284

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

by Appellate Authority is not justified. For above reasons

I record my finding in Point No. 2 as not proved and Point

No.3 in Negative.

18.

Point No.4- in view of my finding in Point No.2,3,

misconduct alleged against workman is not proved from

evidence in Enquiry Proceedings, the punishment of

removal from service or compulsory retirement cannot be

justified or legal, question arises to what relief the workman

is entitled? As charges are not proved, the punishment is

illegal. Workman deserves to be reinstated with continuity

of service with back wages. Accordingly I record my finding

in Point No.4

19.

In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1)

The action of the management of Gun Carriage

Factory, Jabalpur in compulsory retiring Shri

K.Dutta, Ex.Labour, GCF w.e.f. 21-1-1988 is not

proper and legal.

(2)

Management is directed to reinstate workman with

continuity of service and full back wages.

Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman

within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In

case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum

from the date of award till its realization.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2477-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj dLVEl ,.M

lsaVªy ,Dlkbt fMikVZesaV] Hkksiky ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa

vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds

iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@116@07) dks izdkf'kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&42011@139@2007&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014

S.O. 2477.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/

LC/R/116/07) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the

Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers

in relation to the management of Customs & Central Excise

Department, Bhopal and their workmen, which was

received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-42011/139/2007-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/116/07

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R.B.PATLE

General Secretary,

Pichhdavarg Karmchari Kalyan Parishad,

9, Sanwer Road,

Ujjain.

.....Workman/Union

Versus

Commissioner,

Customs & Central Excise Department,

48, Admn. Areas, Arera Hills,

Hoshangabad Road,

Bhopal (MP)

.....Management

AWARD

Passed on this 1st day of August 2014

1.

As per letter dated 27-11-07 by the Government of

India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is

received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under

Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-42011/

139/2007-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:

“Whether the action of the management of

Commissioner, Custom and Central Excise, Bhopal

in terminating the services of their workman Shri

Dinesh Malviya w.e.f. 31-3-03 is legal and justified?

If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?”

2.

After receiving reference , notices were issued to

the parties. Workman filed statement of claim at Page 2/1

to 2/4. Case of Ist party workman is that he was appointed

on permanent post of peon by the Collector on 4-6-98 on

pay Rs. 7018/-. He was continuously working till

termination of his services on 31-3-03. Workman submits

that he had completed 240 days continuous service. His

services were terminated without notice or paying

retrenchment compensation. Termination of his service is

in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. that he is covered

as an employee under Section 25 B of I.D.Act. the

principles of last come first go was not followed by IInd

party. After termination of his services other persons were

engaged. He was not provided employment. IInd party

thereby violated Section 25-H of I.D.Act. On such ground,

workman prays for his reinstatement with consequential

benefits.

3.

IInd party filed Written Statement at page 6/1 to 6/5.

Preliminary objection is raised by IInd party that workman

was not appointed by IInd party. There was no question

of termination of his service. Workman had not

continuously worked. There is no employer employee

relationship, any provisions of Section 25-F, G, H & N are

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6285

not applicable. All material contentions about appointment

of workman on permanent post of peon are denied. IInd

party submits that workman was engaged for 4 hours as

unskilled labour on contract basis. Workman was paid

wages at Collector rate. The contentions about increase

in wages from Rs. 762 to 818, 911 , 986, 1018 are misleading.

That the workman was engaged on purely temporary basis.

No dispute existing between parties covered under Section

25-F of I.D.Act. That as per law, IInd party is not bound to

give notice of termination or pay compensation. IInd party

did not terminate services of workman. Provisions of

I.D.Act are not applicable to IInd party. On such ground,

IInd party prays for rejection of claim.

4.

Workman filed rejoinder at Page 10/1 to 10/2

reiterating his contentions in statement of claim that

services of workman are terminated in violation of Section

25-F of I.D.Act. workman completed 240 days continuous

service. IInd party terminated workman without notice or

paying retrenchment compensation.

5.

Considering pleadings on record, the points which

arise for my consideration and determination are as under.

My findings are recorded against each of them for the

reasons as below:-

(i)

Whether the action of the manage-

In Negative

ment of Commissioner, Custom and

Central Excise, Bhopal in terminating

the services of their workman Shri

Dinesh Malviya w.e.f. 31-3-03 is legal

and justified

(ii) If not, what relief the workman is

As per final

entitled to?”

order

REASONS

6.

Workman is challenging termination of his service

for violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. Management

denied material contentions of workman denying employer

employee relationship. Workman filed affidavit of his

evidence. Workman has stated that he was working for 4

hours in office and 4 hours at residence of the officers

from 4-6-98 to 31-3-03. He worked more than 240days

continuous service. The services were terminated without

paying retrenchment compensation. In his cross-

examination workman says he was engaged by Suptd.

appointment letters were given to him. He received salary

through cashier. He denies working under any contractor.

Appointment letter was issued by the Administrative

Officer. He worked from 4-6-98 to 31-3-03. Thereafter his

services were terminated. IInd party did not adduce

evidence. IInd party admitted documents Exhibit W-3 to

W-16. From those documents, it is clear that workman was

continuously working with IInd party. The certificate

W-16 shows the workman was continuously working from

4-6-98 to 25-9-04. Documents produced by IInd party is

admitted by workman Exhibit M-1 to M-5 shows payments

of amount received by workman. The services of workman

is terminated without notice. No retrenchment is paid to

him. Therefore termination of services of workman is in

violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. For above reasons, I

record my finding in Point No.1 in Negative.

7.

Point No. 2- in view of my finding in Point No.1,

termination of services of workman is in violation of Section

25-F of I.D.Act, question arises whether workman is

entitled to reinstatement with back wages. The

representative of workman Shri R.Nagwanshi submitted

citations in case of Samishta Dube versus City Board

Etawah and another reported in 1999(81)FLR 746. In case

of Sanjay Kumar versus chief Executive, Janpad

Panchayat, Ratlam reported in 2010(3) MPLJ 457. In case

of Sanjay Kumar workman was reinstated with 50 % back

wages. The legal position is shattered from various

judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court that daily wage

employees terminated in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.

Act can not be reinstated, reasonable compensation can

be awarded. In present case, evidence of workman shows

that the period of working of the workman is June 98 to

March-03 about 4 years 9 months. Considering the short

period of working and appointment of workman was not

made after following rules, therefore reinstatement of

workman would not be appropriate. Reasonable

compensation would meet the ends of justice. In my

considered view, compensation Rs. 75,000/- would be

reasonable. Accordingly I record my finding in Point No.2.

8.

In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1)

The action of the management of Commissioner,

Custom and Central Excise, Bhopal in terminating

the services of their workman Shri Dinesh Malviya

w.e.f. 31-3-03 is not proper.

(2)

IInd party is directed to pay compensation Rs. 75,000/

to the workman.

Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman

within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In

case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum

from the date of award till its realization.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2478-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj dLVEl ,.M

lsaVªy ,Dlkbt fMikVZesaV] Hkksiky izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj

muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky; tcyiqj ds

iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@115@07) dks izdkf'kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&42012@71@2007&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

[No. L-42012/71/2007-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

6286

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014

S.O. 2478.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/

LC/R/115/07) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the

Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers

in relation to the management of the Customs & Central

Excise Department, Bhopal and their workmen, which was

received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-42012/71/2007-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/115/07

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R.B. PATLE

General Secretary,

Pichhdavarg Karmchari Kalyan Parishad,

9, Sanwer Road,

Ujjain.

.....Workman/Union

Versus

Commissioner,

Customs & Central Excise Department,

48, Admn. Areas, Arera Hills,

Hoshangabad Road,

Bhopal (MP)

.....Management

AWARD

Passed on this 1st day of August 2014

1.

As per letter dated 27-11-07 by the Government of

India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is

received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under

Section 10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-42012/

71/2007-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:

“Whether the action of the management of

Commissioner, Custom and Central Excise, Bhopal

in terminating the services of their workman Shri

Rajendra Rathore w.e.f. 31-3-03 is legal and justified?

If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?”

2.

After receiving reference, notices were issued to

the parties. Workman filed statement of claim at Page 2/1

to 2/4. Case of Ist party workman is that he was appointed

on permanent post of peon by the Collector on 4-6-98 on

pay Rs. 7018/-. He was continuously working till

termination of his services on 31-3-03. Workman submits

that he had completed 240 days continuous service. His

services were terminated without notice or paying

retrenchment compensation. Termination of his service is

in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. that he is covered

as an employee under Section 25 B of I.D.Act. the

principles of last come first go was not followed by IInd

party. After termination of his services other persons were

engaged. He was not provided employment. IInd party

thereby violated Section 25-H of I.D.Act. On such ground,

workman prays for his reinstatement with consequential

benefits.

3.

IInd party filed Written Statement at page 6/1 to 6/5.

Preliminary objection is raised by IInd party that workman

was not appointed by IInd party. There was no question

of termination of his service. Workman had not

continuously worked. There is no employer employee

relationship, any provisions of Section 25-F, G, H & N are

not applicable. All material contentions about appointment

of workman on permanent post of peon are denied. IInd

party submits that workman was engaged for 4 hours as

unskilled labour on contract basis. Workman was paid

wages at Collector rate. The contentions about increase

in wages from Rs. 762 to 818, 911 , 986, 1018 are misleading.

That the workman was engaged on purely temporary basis.

No dispute existing between parties covered under Section

25-F of I.D.Act. That as per law, IInd party is not bound to

give notice of termination or pay compensation. IInd party

did not terminate services of workman. Provisions of

I.D.Act are not applicable to IInd party. On such ground,

IInd party prays for rejection of claim.

4.

Workman filed rejoinder at Page 9/1 to 9/2 reiterating

his contentions in statement of claim that services of

workman are terminated in violation of Section 25-F of

I.D.Act. workman completed 240 days continuous service.

IInd party terminated workman without notice or paying

retrenchment compensation.

5.

Considering pleadings on record, the points which

arise for my consideration and determination are as under.

My findings are recorded against each of them for the

reasons as below:-

(i)

Whether the action of the manage-

In Negative

ment of Commissioner, Custom and

Central Excise, Bhopal in terminating

the services of their workman Shri

Dinesh Malviya w.e.f. 31-3-03 is legal

and justified

(ii) If not, what relief the workman is

As per final

entitled to?”

order

REASONS

6.

Workman is challenging termination of his service

for violation of Section 25-F of I.D. Act. Management

denied material contentions of workman denying employer

employee relationship. Workman filed affidavit of his

evidence. Workman has stated that he was working for 4

hours in office and 4 hours at residence of the officers

from 4-6-98 to 31-3-03. He worked more than 240 days

continuous service. The services were terminated without

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6287

paying retrenchment compensation. In his cross-

examination workman denies that he worked on contract

basis. He worked as Farrash. Appointment letter was given

to him at Annexure P-1 to P-13. He had not submitted

application. The Suptd. received information about

vacancy from Suptd. in office. He knows N.K. Enterprieses,

but he has no concern with it. After 2 years he was paid

through N.K. Enterprieses, received appointment letter

through Admn. Officer. The wages were fixed at Collector

rate. The cross-examination of the workman did not shatter

his evidence that workman was working with IInd party.

IInd party has admitted documents P-1 to P-14. Bench

clerk is directed to give appropriate number to those

decuments. Those documents corroborate evidence of

workman that he was continuously working with IInd party

from June 88 till termination of his service. The working

hours of workman are shown 4 hours per day. The wages

paid to workman are also shown. IInd party produced

documents re admitted by Ist party. Bench clerk is directed

to give appropriate Exhibit Numbers to all those

documents. IInd party did not adduce any evidence. It

appears that IInd party is supporting claim of workman by

admitting the documents on record. From evidence of

workman and documents produced, it is established that

workman was continuously working with IInd party for

more than 240 days. His services are terminated without

notice, retrenchment compensation is not paid to him.

Termination of services of workman is therefore in violation

of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. For above reasons, I record my

finding in Point No.1 in Negative.

7.

Point No. 2- in view of my finding in Point No.1,

termination of services of workman is in violation of Section

25-F of I.D.Act, question arises whether workman is

entitled to reinstatement with back wages. Workman is

not appointed after following recruitment rules or selection

process. The period of working of the workman is June 98

to March-03 about 4 years 9 months. Considering the short

period of working and appointment of workman was not

made after following rules, therefore reinstatement of

workman would not be appropriate. Reasonable

compensation would meet the ends of justice. In my

considered view, compensation Rs. 75,000/- would be

reasonable. Accordingly I record my finding in Point No.2.

8.

In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1)

The action of the management of Commissioner,

Custom and Central Excise, Bhopal in terminating

the services of their workman Shri Rajendra Rathore

w.e.f. 31-3-03 is not proper.

(2)

IInd party is directed to pay compensation Rs. 75,000

to the workman.

Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman

within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In

case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum

from the date of award till its realization.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2479-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad uksV izsl]

nsokl ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp

vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@92@96) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;

ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&42011@04@95&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014

S.O. 2479.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/

LC/R/92/96) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal

cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure

in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation

to the management of the Bank Note Press, Dewas and

their workman, which was received by the Central

Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-42011/04/95-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/92/96

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R.B.PATLE

General Secretary,

Bank Note Press Office Staff

Association,

Dewas (MP)

.....Workman/Union

Versus

General Manager,

Bank Note Press,

Dewas

Management

AWARD

Passed on this 13th day of August 2014

1.

As per letter dated 27-3-96 by the Government of

India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is

received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under

Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-42011/

4/95-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:

“Whether the action of the management of Bank

Note Press Manager Dewas in enhancing the working

hours from 37 ½ hours to 44 hours per week for

6288

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

office, Estate and Dispensary Staff etc. whose usual

working hours were 37 ½ hours earlier, per week

w.e.f. 28-3-92 without payment of additional incentive

or allowance or double the rate of overtime allowance

is justified or not? If not, to what relief the effected

workmen of Bank Note Press, Dewas (MP) are

entitled to?”

2.

After receiving reference, notices were issued to

the parties. Ist party Union submitted statement of claim

at Page 3/1 to 3/4. Case of Ist party Union is that working

hours of office staff of Bank Note press was 37 ½ hours

per week since establishment of Bank Note Press. Bank

Note Press vide notice dated 23-10-91 proposed to

increase the office hours of all staff in Block VI and LDCs,

UDCs Stenographers and office peons working in the

canteen, Dispensary, workshop, workmen office, control

office, LO office, Ink Factory and Stores etc. from 9 AM to

6 PM with one hour break. The Union had taken objections

to it. The management failed to consider objections of the

Union. Management unilaterally decided to implement

office hours. Subsequently vide office order dated 28-3-

92, management implemented change in office hours from

37 ½ hours to 44 hours per week on 29-3-92. Union

aggrieved by decision of management, entire working class

went on strike. Strike continued to 28-5-92.

3.

It is alleged that management started victimizing

workers by threatening dismissal from services and all

various disciplinary action. Management issued notice of

termination from services in respect of temporary

employees. Under said circumstances, Union was

compelled to arrive at a settlement with the management.

The settlement was signed between representative and

management on 31-7-92. Union had no alternative but to

raise the dispute before ALC, Bhopal. The conciliation

proceedings ended in failure. The dispute is referred for

adjudication. The increase of working hours from 6 ½ hours

per week. It is submitted that employees are entitled to

additional remuneration for extra working hours. Union

demanded additional remuneration for extra work taken

from the employees. Management refused to grant any

extra remuneration that normal working hours of ministerial

staff were 37 ½ hours since beginning. The increase in

working hours should be followed by additional

remunerations. If working hours are increased, pay scale

is to be automatically increased. That management has no

right to increase working hours without increase in pay

scale is reiterated. Management cannot be permitted to

increase working hours according to their will and wishes

without paying additional remunerations. That 4th Pay

Commission has made recommendations. The Pay scale

already fixed for 37 ½ hours per week, 4th Pay Commission

recommended working days 6 in a week. When working

hours were 37 ½ hours with 6 days working in a week, the

increase of working hours to 44 hours per week. The

recommendation for six days in a week was not considered.

The employees working in factory of same establishment

are working 44 hours in a week and getting overtime at

double the rate for extra work done and full incentive

whereas in case of ministerial staff the management has

adopted a step motherly treatment and refused to extent

any benefits to the ministerial staff either at par with the

employees working in the factory or as per

recommendations of the 4th Pay Commission. On such

grounds, Union submits that the employees are entitled

to overtime at double the rate for extra working for 6 ½

hours per week.

4.

Management filed Written Statement at Page 4/1 to

4/11. IInd party submitted that it is undertaking of Govt.

of India registered as Factory Employees of Group B, C

Non-Gazetted Staff B, A etc. is employed. The place being

factory at the time of initial appointment all ministerial

employee were told that they will have to work 48 hours

per week. Said condition was included as condition of

service in offer of appointment. That IVth Pay Commission

in Para 26.6 recommended that working hours of office

staff be increased suitably from present 37 ½ hours

working hours. With a view the need to maintain and

improve the level of productivity and also to reduce the

disparity in the working hours among the industrial

operative and office staff to some extent. Accordingly

working hours of all office staff were enhanced from 37 ½

hours to 40 hours. Govt. of India decided to enhance

normal working hours from 37 ½ hours to 40 hours per

week. The decision of Govt. was conveyed vide letter dated

28-10-87. Since office staff attached to factory are covered

by I.D.Act, notice dated 16-1-88 under Section 9-A of

I.D.Act was issued by management. 5 persons from office

staff vide petition before CAT Jabalpur in February 88

Original Application No. 94/98. Said petition was rejected

on 22-8-88 holding that Government was within its right

to increase the duration of these working hours and also

to rationalize the system prevailing in the 9 units referred

to earlier and also reduce the disparity between working

hours of office staff and administrative wing and the

industrial workers operatives of these organizations. The

staff agitated against increase in working hours. Dispute

was raised before ALC, Bhopal. On failure of conciliation

Government decided not to refer the matter to the Tribunal

in view of order passed by CAT, Jabalpur. On failure of

conciliation proceedings during pendency of petition

before CAT, Jabalpur, Workers Union resorted to strike

from 1-3-88 for 3 days. After protracted negotiation, an

understanding was reached with the office staff and Bank

Note press Shramik Sangh on 4-3-88. With a view to

remove disparity between normal working hours of office

staff and industrial workmen, notice dated 23-10-91 was

issued increasing normal working hours of office staff from

37 ½ hours to 44 hours per week. The staff association

served strike notice requesting withdrawal of the notice.

On failure of conciliation proceeding, the staff proceeded

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6289

on strike on 29-3-92 to 18-5-92. In accordance with

agreement reached between management and Staff

Association in July 1992, strike was called off and working

for 44 hours per week was started from 29-5-92. IInd party

submits that the working hours 37 ½ hours per week were

increased to 44 hours per week. The reference is restricted

as shown in the schedule is not justified. It is reiterated

that the dispute about increase in absence was decided

by CAT, Jabalpur in original application 94/88 on 22-8-88 .

Since the matter is already adjudicated, the reference is

barred by res judicata. The office staff shall observe 16

hours working per week and for extra working hours above

44 normal working hours overtime allowance admissible

as per Government orders is paid. Reason behind increase

of work is to remove disparity between working hours of

office staff and industrial workers as per recommendations

in IVth Pay Commission. It is further submitted that for

extra working beyond normal working hours, the workers

are paid overtime allowance as per scheme. The ministerial

staff who are not directly connected with the production

are getting overtime allowance. On such contentions, IInd

party prays for rejection of claim.

5.

Considering pleadings on record, the points which

arise for my consideration and determination are as under.

My findings are recorded against each of them for the

reasons as below:-

(i)

Whether the action of the Manage- In Affirmative

ment of Bank Note Press Manager

Dewas in enhancing the working

hours from 37 ½ hours to 44 hours

per week for office, Estate and Dis-

pensary Staff etc. whose usual

working hours were 37 ½ hours

earlier, per week w.e.f. 28-3-92

without payment of additional

incentive or allowance or double

the rate of overtime allowance is

justified?

(ii) If not, what relief the workman is

Workmen are

entitled to?

not entitled to

relief claimed.

REASONS

6.

Union has challenged increase of working hours

from 37 ½ hours to 44 hours per week giving notice under

Section-9 of I.D.Act. The claim of Union is opposed by

management. Affidavit of evidence filed by Shri Ashok

Joshi, Ashok Kumar Srivastava supporting contentions

of Union. That the affidavit of those witnesses are devoted

that casual working hours of office staff were 37 ½ hours

per week. Increase of office hours to 44 hours per week is

illegal. Employees are entitled to get additional

remuneration for extra working hours. That IVth Pay

Commission had recommended working hours 44 per week

with 5 days working. Shri Ashok Joshi witness No.1 in his

cross-examination said at the time of appointment,

conditions were explained to him. He had undertaken to

work 44 hours per week on recommendations of IVth Pay

Commission. The working hours were 44 hours per week

with 5 days working. His appointment order provides

condition of working 44 hours in a week. Witness No.2

Ashok Kumar Srivastava in his cross-examination says

that he admitted conditions at the time of his appointment.

That as per IVth Pay Commission, working for 44 hours

per week was recommended . that pay is fixed as per

recommendations of IVth Pay Commission.

7.

Management’s witness Shri Ahake in his affidavit

in para-7 of his affidavit has stated that on

recommendations of IVth Pay Commission, Govt.

enhanced working hours of 37 ½ hours to 44 hours vide

office order dated 28-3-92. His affidavit also devoted about

the order passed by CAT, Jabalpur dated 22-8-98.

Management’s witness in his cross-examination says

employees working 44 hours per week were not getting

benefit of overtime double rate. He denies that IVth Pay

Commission recommended 44 hours working per week.

The contents in Written Statement about the same are

incorrect. He was unable to tell since when Security Press

Nagpur was affected.

8.

The documents are produced Exhibit W-1 Clause IV

provides working hours 37 ½ hours per week. The

authority deserves right to fix such other timings as may

be appropriate. The order dated 9-5-75 about working hours

shows 37 ½ hours working per week for LDCs, UDCs,

stenographers, peons etc. the proforma for appointment

document 4/13 provide 48 hours working for industrial

workers. Letter dated 28-10-87 issued by Under Secretary

of Govt. of India shows that it was decided that normal

working hours for all employees working hours is 44 hours

per day. Notice of change Annexure V was issued for

increasing working hours from 37 ½ hours to 44 hours.

9.

During course of argument, learned counsel for

workman Shri A.K.Shashi emphasized that CGIT Bombay

had upheld claim of Union for 37 ½ hours working per

week, whereas counsel for management Shri Shekhar

Sharma emphasized that CAT Jabalpur had rejected claim

etc. challenging increase of working hours to 44 hours.

The copy of judgment in Original Application No. 94/88,

138/88 is produced. The contentions of the petitioners

opposing increase of working hours to 44 hours per week

has been rejected. Note was taken for decision to increase

the working hours by the government and not by the

management or General Manager. The increase in duration

of working hours of office staff cannot be considered to

be unreasonable. That copy of award passed by CGIT

Bombay is produced. Para-15 of the award at Page 9 clearly

shows that in view of above on request of ALC, the

management agreed- to await for decision of the Calcutta

High Court regarding the increase in the working hours

and not to implement/ enforce the changes proposed vide

their notice dated 16-1-1988 for the time being. In para -22

6290

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

of the award, it was deserved that it is tried to submit on

behalf of the management that the CAT at Hyderabad and

Jabalpur by their judgment dated 16-5-88 & 22-8-88 have

come to the conclusion that change in the working hours

which is tried to be effected by notice dated 16-1-88 is

just, legal and proper. On this basis Government declined

to make a reference in respect of to the dispute which was

raised by the present Union. Concluding part of Para-22 ,

it was observed while answering the reference, what I have

to see is whether the management had a right to increase

the working hours or not. It is not necessary for me to

discuss whether management has a right to increase the

working hours or not. Thus the award by CGIT Bombay

was passed considering breach of agreement to await

decision of Calcutta High Court and not to implement

change proposed vide notice dated 16-1-1988. Thus award

passed by CAT Bombay has not really decided the

controversy about increase of working hours on merit

whereas CAT Jabalpur has decided said controversy on

merit. No doubt the judgment by CAT Jabalpur cannot be

a binding president. However the pleadings and evidence

of the Union and its witnesses above indicated in rational

how increase in working hours is unjustified. The copy of

IVth Pay Commission recommendation about 44 hours per

week is not produced on record. The reasonings given by

CAT Jabalpur in his judgment is on recommendation of

IVth Pay Commission. There was increase in pay scales

that Govt. was justified in increasing working hours. It

appears logical. I find no other ground to hold that increase

in working hours 44 per week by Govt. for office staff is

improper. For above reasons, I record my finding in Point

No.1 in Affirmative.

10.

In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1)

The action of the management of Bank Note Press

Manager Dewas in enhancing the working hours

from 37 ½ hours to 44 hours per week for office,

Estate and Dispensary Staff etc. whose usual working

hours were 37 ½ hours earlier, per week w.e.f. 28-3-

92 is legal and proper.

(2)

The Union/ employees are not entitled to any relief

claimed by him.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2480-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fMikVZesaV vkWiQ

VsyhdE;wfuds'ku] fcykliqj ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj

muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds

iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@216@91) dks izdkf'kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&40012@116@91&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014

S.O. 2480.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/

LC/R/216/91) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in

the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the

employers in relation to the management of Department of

Telecommunication, Bilaspur and their workman, which

was received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-40012/116/91-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/216/91

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE

Shri Ram Gopal Yadav,

S/o Shri S.L.Yadav,

Tikrapara,

Bilaspur

.....Workman

Versus

Telecom District Engineer,

Bilaspur

.....Management

AWARD

Passed on this 31st day of July, 2014

1.

As per letter dated 12-11-91 by the Government of

India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is

received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under

Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-43012/

06/91-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:

“Whether the District Telecom Engineer, Bilaspur

was justified in denying employment/ terminating

the services of Shri Ram Gopal Yadav as a casual

labour w.e.f. 1-3-1981? If not to what relief the

workman is entitled to?”

2.

After receiving reference, notices were issued to

the parties. Ist party workman submitted statement of claim

Page 2/1 to 2/3. Case of Ist party workman is that he was

appointed as casual mazdoor in August, 1979 in telephone

department, Bilaspur. He continuously worked till February,

1981. He continuously worked for 549 days. He claims to

be entitled for regularization in DE category. That he

suffered from illness in February, 1981. He received

treatment from Dr.R.A.Gurudiwan, Govt. Ayurvedic

Dispensary, Barni, Bilaspur. For about 9 years. That after

recovery of illness on 18-11-89 that application was

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6291

submitted after expiry of due period 31-12-88 was called

upon to explain delay. That workman submitted medical

certificate of his fitness. He had raised dispute after the

conciliation failed. On such ground workman prays for its

regularization in “B” Category after completion of 180 days

service. Pay and allowance for the period from 89 to 92 is

also prayed.

3.

IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 6/1 to 6/2.

Claim of workman is denied. Ist party workman was not

continuously working till 1981. He is not entitled for

absorption as per the prevailing rules. All other contentions

of workman are denied. It is submitted that Ist party

workman is not entitled to any claim as he remained absent

for 9 years. IInd party prayed for rejection of claim.

4.

Considering pleadings on record, the points which

arise for my consideration and determination are as under.

My findings are recorded against each of them for the

reasons as below:-

(i)

Whether the District Telecom

In Affirmative

Engineer, Bilaspur was justified

in denying employment/ terminating

the services of Shri Ram Gopal Yadav

as a casual labour w.e.f. 1-3-1981?

(ii) If not, what relief the workman is

Workman is not

entitled to?”

entitled to any

relief as claimed

by him.

REASONS

5.

The terms of reference relates to legality of

termination of services of Ist party workman. However

the statement of claim is filed claiming regularization after

completion of 180 days working. Above claim in statement

of claim is beyond terms of reference.

6.

Workman filed affidavit of his witness Shri

M.R.Dhurv supporting contentions raised in Written

Statement of IInd party. The management’s witness also

remained absent for cross-examination by workman. Both

parties half heartedly participated in reference proceeding.

Ist party as well as witness of management did not remain

present for cross-examination. Evidence of both of them

cannot be considered. For absence of evidence, the claim

of workman cannot be accepted. Therefore I record my

finding in Point No.1 in Affirmative.

7.

In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1)

The action of District Telecom Engineer, Bilaspur in

denying employment/ terminating the services of

Shri Ram Gopal Yadav as a casual labour w.e.f. 1-3-

1981 is proper and legal.

(2)

Workman is not entitled to relief claimed by him.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2481-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj tokgj uoksn;

fo|ky; lfefr ,.M vnlZ ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj

muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds

iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 63@2006) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;

ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&42012@39@2006&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh

New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014

S.O. 2481.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 63/2006)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour

Court, Jaipur now as shown in the Annexure in the

Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to

the management of the Jawahar Novodaya Vidyalaya

Samiti & Others and their workmen, whcih was received

by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-42012/39/2006-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

vuqca/k

vuqca/k

vuqca/k

vuqca/k

vuqca/k

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je

U;k;ky;] t;iqj lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- izdj.k

U;k;ky;] t;iqj lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- izdj.k

U;k;ky;] t;iqj lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- izdj.k

U;k;ky;] t;iqj lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- izdj.k

U;k;ky;] t;iqj lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- izdj.k

la-

la-la-

la-la- 63/2006

Hkjr ik.Ms;] ihBklhu vfèkdkjh

jsQjsUl ua--L- 42012/39/2006–IR(DU) fnukad 11/10/2006

Shri Hari Prasad Joshi S/o. Shri Mathuralal Joshi,

Through Shri Baldev Singh, Legal Advisor, Dudwara,

Distt.- Kota (Rajasthan)

v/s

1.

The Director, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti,

Regional Office – A-12, Shastri Nagar,

Near Pital Factory, Jaipur – 302016

2.

The Principal, Jawahar Navidaya Vidyalaya,

Village & P.O.- Chhan,

Distt.- Tonk (Rajasthan)

izkFkhZ dh rjQ ls % Jh j?kquUnu 'kekZ & ,MoksdsV

vizkFkhZ dh rjQ ls% Jh gokbZ flag & izfrfufèk

% iapkV %

fnukad % 30&07&2014

1-

dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947

dh èkkjk 10 dh mi&èkkjk 1 ds [k.M+ (?k) ds vUrxZr fnukad 11/

10/2006 ds vkns’k ls izsf"kr fookn ds vkèkkj ij ;g izdj.k

U;k;fu.kZ;u gsrq lafLFkr gSA dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk izsf"kr fookn

fuEuor~ gS %&

6292

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

2.

“Whether the action of the management of the

Principal Navodaya Vidyalaya, Chhan, Tonk, in

terminating the services of Shri Hari Prasad Joshi

w.e.f. 15.07.2005 is Just and legal? If not, to what

relief the workman is entitled to?”

3-

Je ea=ky; ds vkns’k fnukad 13-6-2012 }kjk mijksDr

jsQjsUl fnukad 11-10-2006 dks la’kksfèkr fd;k x;k gS ftldks

fuEu :Ik esa xzg.k fd;k tkuk gS %&

“Whether Shri Hari Prasad Joshi S/o Shri Mathura

Lal Joshi was employed from 13.07.1996 to 14.07.2005

for 240 days in a year under the Principal,

NavodayaVidhayalaya, Village Chhan, District Tonk ?

if so, whether the action of the Principal, Navodaya

Vidhayalaya simiti in terminating the services of Shri

Hari Prasad Joshi w.e.f. 15.07.2005 is legal and

Justified? If not what relief the workman is entitled

to?”

4-

LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse ds vuqlkj laf{kIr% izkFkhZ gfj izlkn

tks’kh dk dFku gS fd og okgu pkyd (MªkbZoj) ds in ij

foi{kh ds laLFkku esa thi pykus ds fy;s izkpk;Z] tokgj uoksn;

fo|ky;] Nku ftyk&Vksad }kjk fnukad 13-7-1996 dks fjDr

LFkku ij fu;qDr fd;k x;k FkkA izkFkhZ dks dksbZ fu;qfDr&i=

ugha fn;k x;k FkkA izkFkhZ yxkrkj bZekunkjh o esgur ls ukSdjh

dj jgk FkkA izkFkhZ us fnukad 9-8-99 rd 12 dSysUMj ekg esa 240

fnu ls vfèkd dk;Z dj fy;k rks izkpk;Z us vdkj.k dk;Z nsuk

cUn dj fn;kA izkFkhZ us foi{khx.k ls vuqjksèk fd;k rks izkpk;Z us

dgk ubZ xkM+h vk jgh gS vkSj xkM+h vkus ij izkpk;Z] egksn; izkFkhZ

dks dk;Z nsaxsA vkxs izkFkhZ dk dFku gS fd vxLr 1999 ls ekpZ

2003 rd foi{khx.k us izkFkhZ dks ukSdjh ugha nhA blds ckn

2003 vkSj 2004 esa foi{kh us chp&chp esa dk;Z fn;kA blds ckn

26-6-2004 ls dk;Z fn;k ijUrq 15-7-2005 ls fcuk dksbZ uksfVl

;k uksfVl ds cnys esa osru ;k {kfriwfrZ HkRrk fn;s ukSdjh ls gVk

fn;kA izkFkhZ dk dFku gS fd foi{kh }kjk izkFkhZ dks ukSdjh ls

gVkuk NaVuh dk dk;Z gS tks voSèk ,oa vuqfpr gS rFkk vkS|ksfxd

fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk 25&,Q ds foijhr gSA

5-

;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ dk dk;Z fu;fer izÑfr dk

gS vkSj foi{kh ;g dk;Z u;k pkyd j[kdj djok jgk gS tks

vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk 25&,p ds izkfoèkku

ds foijhr gS vkSj voSèk gSA ;g Hkh dgk x;k fd izkFkhZ vkt Hkh

csjkstxkj gS vkSj foi{kh us izkFkhZ }kjk 12 dyS.M+j ekg esa 240

fnu ls vfèkd dk;Z djus ds ckotwn mls ukSdjh ls gVk fn;k

vr% U;k;ky; ;g ?kks"k.kk djs fd fnukad 15-7-2005 ls foi{kh

}kjk ukSdjh ls gVkus dk dk;Z voSèk ,oa vuqfpr gS rFkk izkFkhZ

lsok dh fujUrjrk lfgr lEiw.kZ osru ds lkFk lsok esa okil

fu;qDr gksus dk gdnkj gSA

6-

LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse ds fo:) izLrj tokc fnukafdr

29-3-2010 esa foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls i`"B 1 ls ysdj i`"B 7 rd

izkjfEHkd vkifRr izLrqr dh x;h gS vkSj i`"B 8 ls i`"B 14 rd

izLrjokj oknksÙkj izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA

7-

izLrjokj vkifÙk esa LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse ds izLrj 1 esa

Je ea=ky; }kjk izsf"kr jsQjsUl dks Lohdkj fd;k x;k gS vkSj

dgk x;k gS fd Dyse vkS|ksfxd U;k;kfèkdj.k ds le{k iks"k.kh;

ugha gksus ds dkj.k fujLr gksus ;ksX; gSA izLrj 2] 3] 4] 5 vkSj

6 ds dFku dks vlR;] vkèkkjghu] lkjghu vkSj fofèk fo:) gksus

ds dkj.k vLohdkj fd;k x;k gSA vfrfjDr dFku esa ;g dgk

x;k gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk mBk;k x;k fookn vkS|ksfxd fookn

vfèkfu;e 1947 dh ifjfèk esa ugha gksus ds dkj.k iks"k.kh; ugha

gS vkSj fujLr gksus ;ksX; gS D;ksafd tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;

vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 esa ifjHkkf"kr **m|ksx** dh

ifjHkk"kk dh ifjfèk esa ugha gSA

8-

;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ dks foi{khx.k ds laLFkku esa

tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] ftyk Vksad esa dHkh Hkh fdlh Hkh vkns’k

}kjk fdlh Hkh in ij fu;qDr ugha fd;k x;k FkkA ;g Hkh dgk

x;k fd okLrfod rF; ;g gS fd izkFkhZ dks dk;Z dh miyCèkrk

dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq;s iw.kZ :Ik ls rnFkZ vkèkkj ij vkdfLed

nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa dk;Z dh miyCèkrk jgus rd vkSj

fu;fer deZpkjh ds miyCèk gksus rd fu;ksftr fd;k x;kA

9-

oknksÙkj ds izLrj 3 esa foi{khx.k dk dFku gS fd izkpk;Z

us dHkh Hkh izkFkhZ dks u rks vdkj.k dk;Z nsuk cUn fd;k vkSj u

gh ubZ xkM+h vkus ij izkFkhZ dks dk;Z nsus dk vk’oklu fn;k

cfYd okLrfod oLrqfLFkfr ;g gS fd izkFkhZ Lo;a vU;= csgrj

nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa fu;kstu miyCèk gksus ds dkj.k

tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] ftyk&Vksad esa mifLFkr ugha gqvk vkSj

tc rc vkdfLed dk;Z dh miyCèkrk gq;h rks izkFkhZ ,sls dk;Z

djus gsrq nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa mifLFkr gqvk rks izkpk;Z

}kjk mls nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa dk;Z fn;k x;k] bl rF;

dh iqf"V izkFkhZ }kjk fnukad 3-3-2006 ls 8-3-2003 rd (6 fnu),

26-3-2003 ls 30-3-2003 rd (5 fnu)] fnukad 22-8-2003 vkSj

24-8-2003 dks ek= ,d&,d fnu dk;Z ij mifLFkr gksus vkSj

dk;Z fu"iknu djus ds rF; ls Hkyh&Hkk¡fr gksrh gSA foi{khx.k

dh rjQ ls mDr rF; dk fooj.k le>kSrk vfèkdkjh] dksVk ds

le{k tokc esa Li"V :Ik ls vafdr fd;k x;k gSA izkFkhZ }kjk

izLrqr izkFkZuk&i= fnukafdr 8-11-2005 ¼izn’kZ M&1½ rFkk

foi{khx.k dk tokc fnukafdr 24-11-2005 oknksÙkj ds lkFk

layXu gSA fookn dh iks"k.kh;rk ds lEcUèk foi{khx.k }kjk

le>kSrk vfèkdkjh ds le{k izLrqr izfrosnu fnukafdr 9-12-

2005 ¼izn’kZ M&3½ Hkh oknksÙkj ds lkFk layXu gSA

10-

;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa fnukad

15-7-2005 dks izkFkhZ dh lsok lekfIr dk rF; vlR;] vkèkkjghu]

lkjghu ,oa fofèk fo:) vafdr fd;k x;k gS D;ksafd mls dHkh

fdlh fyf[kr vkns’k }kjk fu;ksftr ugha fd;k x;kA fnuakd

3-3-2003 dks izkFkhZ dk;Z dh vkdfLed miyCèkrk ds dkj.k

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6293

fo|ky; esa iqu% mifLFkr gqvk vkSj fnukad 8-3-2003 dks vuqifLFkr

gks x;kA blds ckn fnukad 26-3-2003 dks mifLFkr gksdj iqu%

30-3-2003 rd dk;Z fd;k vkSj iqu% vuqifLFkr gks x;kA blds

ckn izkFkhZ fnukad 22-8-2003 dks mifLFkr gqvk vkSj mlh fnu

,d fnol dk dk;Z dj iqu% vuqifLFkr gks x;kA blds ckn

fnukad 24-6-2004 dks mifLFkr gqvk vkSj dk;Z dj mlh fnu

vuqifLFkr gks x;kA blds ckn fnukad 12-5-2005 dks yxHkx

2 lky ckn izkFkhZ mifLFkr gqvkA fnukad 25-5-2005 rd dk;Zjr

jgk rRi’pkr~ iqu% vuqifLFkr gks x;kA blds ckn iqu% fnukad

8-6-2005 dks mifLFkr gqvk vkSj fnukad 14-7-2005 rd dk;Zjr

jgk vkSj iqu% vuqifLFkr gks x;kA blls Li"V gS fd izkFkhZ dk

LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse vkèkkjghu gS vkSj i=koyh ij miyCèk

vfHkysf[k; lk{; ds fo:) gSA izkFkhZ dk mn~ns’; fcuk dk;Z

fd;s vkfFkZd ykHk ikuk gS vkSj foi{khx.k ij fu;kstu gsrq ncko

cukus dk vlQy iz;kl gSA mDr rF;ksa dk mYys[k foi{khx.k

}kjk le>kSrk vfèkdkjh ds le{k fookn ds tokc esa fd;k x;k

gSA le>kSrk vfèkdkjh ds le{k izLrqr mÙkj izn’kZ M&4

oknksÙkj ds lkFk layXu gS mDr fLFkfr ls ;g Li"V gS fd izkFkhZ

us ,d dyS.M+j o"kZ esa 240 fnu dk;Z ugha fd;k gS vkSj bl

izdkj èkkjk 25&,Q ds izkoèkku ykxw ugha gksrs gSA

11-

LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse ds izLrj 4 ds fo:) ;g dgk x;k

gS fd foi{khx.k }kjk le>kSrk vfèkdkjh] dksVk ds le{k izkFkhZ dh

izkFkZuk&i= fnukad 6-2-2006 dk mÙkj izLrqr dj Li"V :Ik ls

;g mYys[k fd;k x;k Fkk fd izkFkhZ dks fo|ky; esa fu;fer :Ik

ls dk;Z djus ds fy;s dHkh Hkh fu;ksftr ugha fd;k x;k Fkk ,o¡

izkFkhZ }kjk ftl dk;Z izek.k&i= fnukad 21-2-1999 dk mYys[k

fd;k x;k gS og dsoy ek= izkFkhZ dks {ks=h; dk;kZy; ls

dk;ZeqfDr ls lEcfUèkr gS rFkk mDr dk;ZeqfDr vkns’k dks fdlh

Hkh vkèkkj ij izkFkhZ ds yxkrkj dk;Zjr jgus dk izek.k ugha ekuk

tk ldrkA mDr rF;ksa dh iqf"V izkFkhZ }kjk izLrqr fnukafdr

6-2-2006 e; layXu nLrkost rFkk foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls

izLrqr mÙkj ls HkyhHkkWrh gksrh gS ftldh ,d Nk;kizfrfyfi

izn’kZ M&5 ,oa izn’kZ M&6 layXu gSaA

12-

LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse ds izLrj 5 ds fo:) oknksÙkj esa

mYys[k gS fd Lo;a izkFkhZ bl rF; dks Lohdkj djrk gS fd mlus

fu;fer fu;qfDr gsrq okgu pkyd ds in ij lk{kkRdkj gsrq

fnuakd 4-4-1998 dks izkFkZuk izLrqr dj Hkkx ysuk pkgk FkkA vr%

fu;ekuqlkj fu;qfDr dh fuèkkZfjr izfØ;k esa lQy gksus ds

i’pkr~ gh okgu pkyd ds in ij fu;qfDr izkIr dh tk ldrh

gSA

13-

izLrj 6 ds fo:) ;g dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ us lsok

lekfIr dh frfFk fnukad 15-7-2005 ds iwoZ 12 dyS.Mj ekg esa

240 fnu dk;Z ugha fd;k gS] vr% èkkjk 25&,Q ds izkfoèkku ykxw

ugha gksrs gSa vkSj u gh foi{khx.k }kjk èkkjk 25&,Q ds izkfoèkku

dk mYya?ku fd;k x;k gS] vr% izkFkhZ dk Dyse fujLr gksus ;ksX;

gS vkSj izkFkhZ ;kfpr vuqrks"k ikus dk gdnkj ugha gSA

14-

izkjfEHkd vkifÙk esa ;g dgk x;k gS fd tokgj uoksn;

fo|ky; **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk esa ugha vkrk gS vr% U;k;kfèkdj.k

ds le{k izkFkhZ dk Dyse iks"k.kh; ugha gSA ;g Hkh dgk x;k gS

fd izkFkhZ ds i{k esa dksbZ okn gsrqd mRiUu ugha gqvk gS blfy;s

Hkh LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse iks"k.kh; ugha gSA ;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd

tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] ftyk&Vksad] uoksn; fo|ky; lfefr

dh ,d vfHkUu bdkbZ gS tks ekuo lalkèku fodkl ea=ky;]

Hkkjr ljdkj dk ,d vfHkUu vax gSA izkFkhZ us uoksn; fo|ky;

lfefr dks i{kdkj ugha cuk;k gS] vr% okn esa vko’;d i{kdkjksa

dh vla;kstu ds dkj.k okn fujLr gksus ;ksX; gSA

15-

;kfpdk ds izLrj 5 esa dgk x;k gS fd foi{kh dk laLFkku

,d 'kS{kf.kd laLFkku gS tgk¡ eSèkkoh Nk=ksa dks fu%’kqYd f’k{kk

iznku dh tkrh gSA vizkFkhZ laLFkku esa ,slh dksbZ Hkh xfrfofèk

vFkok fØ;kdyki ugha fd;k tkrk gS tks okf.kfT;d laLFkku ,o¡

O;olkf;d bdkbZ;ksa }kjk vke tufgr] tui;ksxh lsok ,o¡

mRikn dk mRiknu fd;k tkrk gS] vr% foi{kh dk laLFkku

**m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk esa ugha vkrk gS tSlk fd ekuuh; loksZPp

U;k;ky; }kjk fQftdy fjlpZ yscksjsVªh cuke ds-th- ’kekZ ds

izdj.k esa dgk x;k gSA

16-

;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd fgeka’kq dqekj fo|kFkhZ o vU; cuke

fcgkj jkT; o vU; ds izdj.k eas ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us

;g fl)kUr izfrikfnr fd;k gS fd nSfud osru Hkksxh deZdkj

dh lsok lekfIr fdlh Hkh izdkj ls LoPNUn] fujadq’k ,oa

euekuh ugha dgh tk ldrh] D;ksafd ,sls deZdkj dk fdlh Hkh

in ds lEcUèk esa dksbZ vfèkdkj ugha gksrk gSA

17-

izkjfEHkd vkifÙk ds izLrj 7 esa ;g dgk x;k gS fd

uoksn; fo|ky; lfefr ,d iathÑr laLFkk gS] ftldk iath;u]

laLFkk iathdj.k vfèkfu;e] 1860 ds rgr gqvk gS rFkk uoksn;

fo|ky; lfefr }kjk lfefr ds lapkyu rFkk lfefr }kjk

lapkfyr fd;s tk jgs uoksn; fo|ky;ksa gsrq lEiw.kZ fu;ekoyh

cukbZ xbZ gS] ftlds rgr fdlh in ij ;ksX; vk’kkFkhZ dh

fu;qfDr fuèkkZfjr p;u izfØ;k ds }kjk gh dh tk ldrh gSA

izkFkhZ mlds dFkukuqlkj ,d flfoy in èkkfjr djrk gS vr%

bl vkèkkj ij Hkh izkFkhZ }kjk mBk;k x;k fookn vkS|ksfxd fookn

vfèkfu;e] 1947 dh ifjfèk esa ugha vkrk gSA

18-

;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd izLrqr izdj.k lsok ls lEcfUèkr

izdj.k gS rFkk iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k vfèkfu;e]1985 ds ykxw

gksus ds Ik’pkr~ fo"k;oLrq ds lEcUèk esa dk;Zokgh iz’kklfud

vfèkdj.k vfèkfu;e]1985 ds rgr xfBr dsUnzh; iz’kklfud

vfèkdj.k ds le{k gh dh tk ldrh gS D;ksafd lsok lEcUèkh

izdj.k esa lEiw.kZ {ks=kfèkdkj iz’kklfud vfèkfu;e] 1985 ds rgr

xfBr iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k esa fufgr gks pqdk gS ,oa uoksn;

fo|ky; lfefr ds lEcUèk esa dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk èkkjk 14¼2½

dh 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq;s lsok lEcfUèkr izdj.kksa ds

lEcUèk esa lEiw.kZ {ks=kfèkdkj iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k vfèkfu;e]1985

6294

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ds vUrxZr l`ftr vfèkdj.kksa esa fufgr dj fn;k x;k gSA

izkFkhZ&Jfed }kjk tks okn@fookn mBk;k x;k gS og mlds

}kjk **flfoy iksLV** ls lEcfUèkr gS] vr% ,slh ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa

izdj.k dks iz’kklfud vfèkfu;e]1985 ds vUrxZr xfBr iz’kklfud

vfèkdj.k ds le{k gh mBk;k tk ldrk gSA uoksn; fo|ky;

lfefr ,d iathd`r laLFkk gS ftldk iath;u] laLFkk iathdj.k

vfèkfu;e] 1860 ds rgr gqvk gS rFkk uoksn; fo|ky; lfefr

}kjk lfefr ds lapkyu rFkk lfefr }kjk lapkfyr fd;s tk jgs

uoksn; fo|ky;ksa gsrq lEiw.kZ fu;ekoyh cuk;h x;h gS ftlds

rgr fdlh in ij ;ksX; vk’kkFkhZ dh fu;qfDr fuèkkZfjr p;u

izfdz;k ds }kjk gh dh tk ldrh gS D;ksafd izkFkhZ mlds

dFkukuqlkj ,d flfoy in èkkfjr djrk gSA vr% bl vkèkkj ij

Hkh izkFkhZ }kjk mBk;k x;k fookn vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e]

1947 dh ifjfèk esa ugha vkrk gSA

19-

;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ dks nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik

esa fu;fer okgu pkyd miyCèk ugha gksus ds dkj.k vkdfLed

:Ik ls fu;ksftr fd;k x;k Fkk rFkk fu;fer okgu pkyd

miyCèk gks tkus ds rRi’pkr~ izkFkhZ }kjk fd;s tk jgs vkdfLed

dk;Z dh miyCèkrk lekIr gks x;hA vr% mifLFkr rF;ksa ,o¡

ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa izkFkhZ }kjk izLrqr izkFkZuk i= lO;; fujLr

Qjek;sa tkus ;ksX; gSA

20-

;kph i{k dh rjQ ls oknksÙkj ds fo:) tckcqy&tckc

izLrqr fd;k x;k gS ftlesa LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse dh iqujko`fÙk

dh x;h gSA izkjfEHkd vkifÙk ds fo:) Hkh tokc izLrqr fd;k

x;k gS] ftlesa dgk x;k gS fd foi{kh dk laLFkku vkS|ksfxd

fookn vfèkfu;e dh ifjHkk"kk esa ifjHkkf"kr **m|ksx** dh Js.kh esa

vkrk gSA ;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ ds ikl okn izLrqr djus

dk Ik;kZIr dkj.k gS vkSj fcuk uksfVl fn;s foi{kh us gVk fn;k

bl dkj.k okn mRiUu gqvkA izkFkhZ dk fu;kstd foi{kh gS]

blfy;s mls i{kdkj cuk;k x;k gS vkSj tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;

lfefr dks Hkh i{kdkj cuk;k gS vr% vko’;d i{kdkjksa ds

la;kstu dk nks"k ugha gSA ;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd pwafd nSfud

osru Hkksxh **deZdkj** dh Js.kh esa vkrk gS] blfy;s vkS|ksfxd

fookn vfèkfu;e dh èkkjk 25&F, G ,o¡ H dk izkfoèkku ykxw gksrk

gS vkSj fgeka’kq dqekj fo|kFkhZ o vU; cuke fcgkj jkT; o vU;

dk n`"VkUr orZeku ekeys esa ykxw ugha gksrk gSA izkFkhZ vkS|ksfxd

fookn vfèkfu;e dh èkkjk 2 ¼,l½ esa ifjHkkf"kr **deZdkj** dh

ifjHkk"kk vkSj foi{k 2 ¼ts½ esa ifjHkkf"kr **m|ksx** dh Js.kh esa vkrs

gS ftlds vuqlkj nksuksa i{kdkjksa ds chp mRiUu fookn èkkjk 2

¼ds½ esa ifjHkkf"kr **vkS|ksfxd fookn** dh Js.kh esa vkrk gSA izkFkhZ

dks ftl rjhds ls lsok&eqDr fd;k x;k gS og èkkjk 2 ¼00½ esa

ifjHkkf"kr **NaVuh** dh Js.kh esa vkrk gS blfy;s U;k;kfèkdj.k dks

orZeku ekeys esa lquokbZ dk {ks=kfèkdkj izkIr gS ,o¡ mDr dkj.kkas

ds vkèkkj ij iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k dks lquokbZ dk {ks=kfèkdkj

ugha gSA

21-

izkjfEHkd vkifÙk ds izLrj 10 ds fo:) dFku dks vLohdkj

djrs gq, ;g dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ dh lsok eqfDr ds ckn foi{kh

us nSfud osru Hkksxh deZpkjh dks gh MªkbZoj ds in ij j[kk gSA

fu;fer okgu pkyd dh fu;qfDr dh frfFk ugha vafdr dh gS]

ftlls Li"V ugha gS fd mldh fu;qfDr dc dh x;h] vr%

fu;kstd }kjk mBk;h x;h izkjfEHkd vkifÙk fujLr dh tk; vkSj

ekeys dh lquokbZ xq.kkoxq.k ds vkèkkj ij fd tk;A

22-

;kph i{k dh rjQ ls izysf[k; lk{; ds :Ik esa izn’kZ

W&1 yxk;r izn’kZ W&5 vfHkys[k izLrqr fd;k x;k gS blds

vfrfjDr izkFkhZ gfj izlkn tks’kh dk 'kiFk&i= izLrqr fd;k x;k

gS ftudh izfrifj{kk foi{k }kjk dh x;h gSA

23-

foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls vfHkys[k M&1 yxk;r M&6

izLrqr gSA foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls Jh lqèkhj pUn è;kuh] izkpk;Z]

tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] ftyk&Vksad dk 'kiFk&i= lk{; esa

izLrqr fd;k x;k gS ftudh izfrifj{kk ;kph i{k }kjk dh x;h

gSA

24-

foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls lwph lfgr vfHkys[k izLrqr fd;s

x;s gS tks izn’kZ M&1 yxk;r izn’kZ M&5 gSA blds vfrfjDr

;kph dh mifLFkr rkfydk rFkk Hkqxrku dh QksVksizfr izLrqr gSA

orZeku izn’kZ M&1 yxk;r izn’kZ M&5 iwoZ esa vafdr M&1

yxk;r 6 ls fHkUu vfHkys[k gSA iwoZ es izLrqr M&1 yxk;r

M&6 oknksÙkj ds lkFk izLrqr fd;s x;s gSA

25-

izkFkhZ i{k dh rjQ ls fuEufyf[kr fofèkd n`"VkUr izLrqr

fd;s x;s gS %&

¼1½ 2003 osLVuZ ykW dslst ¼jktLFkku½] ;w-lh- i`"B 523 jktLFkku

mPp U;k;ky; ¼t;iqj [k.M+ihB½] tujy eSustj cuke fn

yscj dksVZ o vU;

¼2½ 2008 osLVuZ ykW dslst ¼jktLFkku½] ;w-lh- i`"B 730 jktLFkku

mPp U;k;ky;] tkSèkiqj ¼[k.M+ihB½] jkT; ,oa vU; cuke

fxfjjkt izLkkn ,oa vU;

¼3½ 2007 ,-vkbZ-vkj-] ,l-lh-MCY;w- i`"B 1712 eSllZ Jhjke

b.M+LVªh;y ,UVjizkbtst cuke egd flag ,oa vU;

¼4½ 2005 ¼4½ i`"B 90] osLVuZ ykW dslst] jktLFkku mPp

U;k;ky; ¼tkSèkiqj½] ;wfu;u vkWQ bf.M+;k ,o¡ vU; cuke Je

U;k;ky; ,o¡ vU;

¼5½ 2005 osLVuZ ykW dslst ¼jktLFkku½] ;w-lh-] i`"B 737 jktLFkku

mPp U;k;ky; ¼t;iqj [k.M+ihB½] Mk;jsDVj nwjn’kZu dsUnz

cuke fn tt] dsUnzh; vfèkdj.k ,o¡ vU;

26- foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls fuEu n`"VkUr izLrqr fd;s x;s gSa %&

¼1½ ¼1997½ 4 ,l-lh-lh- i`"B 257 fQftdy fjlpZ yscksjsVªh &

vihykFkhZ cuke ds-th- 'kekZ & izR;FkhZ

¼2½ ¼1997½ 4 ,l-lh-lh- i`"B 391 fgekU’kq dqekj fo|kFkhZ ,o¡

vU;& ;kphx.k cuke LVsV vkWQ fcgkj ,o¡ vU;&izR;FkhZx.k

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6295

¼3½ ¼2002½ 3 ,l-lh-lh- i`"B 25 flfoy vihy ua- 2002 dk

1283 jsUt QkWjsLV vkWfQlj &vihykFkhZ cuke ,l-Vh- gkfnekuh

& izR;FkhZ

27-

eSus mHk;i{k ds fo}ku vfèkoDrk dh cgl lquh rFkk

i=koyh dk lE;d~ voyksdu fd;kA ;kph i{k dh rjQ ls

fyf[kr cgl Hkh izLrqr dh x;hA

28-

tgka rd tokgj uoksn; fo|ky; dk **m|ksx** dh

ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gksus dk iz’u gS] foi{khx.k ds fo}ku

vfèkoDrk dh rjQ ls ;g cgl fd x;h gS fd tokgj uoksn;

fo|ky; **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr ugha gS blfy;s

izkFkhZ dk Dyse iks"k.kh; ugha gSA blds fo:) izkFkhZ i{k ds fo}ku

vfèkoDrk dh rjQ ls ;g cgl dh x;h gS vkSj fyf[kr cgl

ds izLrj 4 esa ;g mYys[k fd;k x;k gS dh ekuuh; U;k;ky;

us vius dbZ n`"VkUrksa esa uoksn; fo|ky; dks **m|ksx** dh Js.kh

esa ekuk gSA mYys[kuh; gS fd ;kph i{k dh rjQ ls vius

fyf[kr cgl esa Hkh fdlh n`"VkUr dk mYys[k ugha fd;k x;k

gS ftlesa uoksn; fo|ky; dks **m|ksx** dh Js.kh esa n’kkZ;k x;k

gksA foi{k }kjk 1947 2 ¼4½ ,l-lh-lh- i`"B 257 HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku

iz;ksx’kkyk cuke ds-th- 'kekZ ds n`"VkUr dk mYys[k oknksÙkj

dh izkjfEHkd vkifRr esa fd;k x;k gSA

29-

tgkW rd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk cuke ds-th- 'kekZ

ds n`"VkUr esa nh x;h fofèk O;oLFkk dk iz’u gS ftldk mYys[k

foi{khx.k us vius oknksÙkj esa fd;k gS] ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky;

ds le{k vihy esa ;g iz’u fopkj.kh; Fkk fd D;k vihykFkhZ

HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk] vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947

dh èkkjk 2 ¼ts½ esa ifjHkkf"kr **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr

gS \ bl ekeys esa izR;FkhZ ds-th- ’kekZ fnukad 25-10-1948 dks

**lkbZUlfVfQd Xykl Cyksoj** ds in ij fu;qDr gq, vkSj bl

in ij jgrs gq, 11-5-1976 dks QksVksxzkQh MkD;weSaUVs’ku lfoZlsl

esa ,d ,sls in ij LFkkukUrfjr dj fn;s x;s tks xSj&rduhdh

vkSj iz’kkluhd in FkkA fnukad 31-12-1978 dks mudh mez 58

o"kZ iwjh gks xbZ ftlds ifj.kkeLo:Ik mUgsa fnukad 1-1-1979 dks

lsokfuo`Ùk dj fn;k x;kA 58 lky dh mez esa lsokfuo`Ùk dj

fn;s tkus ds dkj.k vkSj 60 lky rd lsok dk volj u fn;s

tkus ds dkj.k mUgksaus ekuuh; xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky; ds le{k

fjV ;kfpdk izLrqr dhA blh chp mUgksaus Je vk;qDr ds le{k

lsokfuo`Ùk dj fn;s tkus ds fo:) f’kdk;r izLrqr dh ftlds

ifj.kkeLo:Ik Je vk;qDr us mudk ekeyk Je U;k;ky;]

vgenkckn dks izsf"kr dj fn;kA Je U;k;ky;] vgenkckn us

vihykFkhZ HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk dk ;g dFku vLohdkj

dj fn;k fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk

ls vkPNkfnr ugha gS tSlk fd vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 2¼ts½

esa dgk x;k gSA HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk dks **m|ksx** gksus

dh voèkkj.kk O;Dr djus ds lkFk&lkFk fo}ku Je U;k;ky;

us ;g fu"d"kZ Hkh fn;k fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk ,d

vuqlaèkku laLFkku gS ftlds }kjk fd;k tk jgk vuqlaèkku oLrqvksa

vFkok lsok dh mRikn ] vkiwfrZ vFkok forj.k ls tqMk gqvk ugha

gSA Je U;k;ky; us ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk 1978 ¼2½

,l-lh-lh- i`"B 213 okVj lIykbZ ,.M flojst cksMZ cuke

okVj lIykbZ ,.M flojst cksMZ cuke

okVj lIykbZ ,.M flojst cksMZ cuke

okVj lIykbZ ,.M flojst cksMZ cuke

okVj lIykbZ ,.M flojst cksMZ cuke

,- jktkIik

,- jktkIik

,- jktkIik

,- jktkIik

,- jktkIik esa nh xbZ fofèk O;oLFkk ds vkèkkj ij mDr

voèkkj.kk O;Dr dhA Je U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh ik;k fd

Je U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh ik;k fd

Je U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh ik;k fd

Je U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh ik;k fd

Je U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh ik;k fd

HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk Lo;a rFkk vius deZpkfj;ksa

HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk Lo;a rFkk vius deZpkfj;ksa

HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk Lo;a rFkk vius deZpkfj;ksa

HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk Lo;a rFkk vius deZpkfj;ksa

HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk Lo;a rFkk vius deZpkfj;ksa

ds lfØ; lg;ksx ls laxfBr ,oa lqO;ofLFkr i)fr ds

ds lfØ; lg;ksx ls laxfBr ,oa lqO;ofLFkr i)fr ds

ds lfØ; lg;ksx ls laxfBr ,oa lqO;ofLFkr i)fr ds

ds lfØ; lg;ksx ls laxfBr ,oa lqO;ofLFkr i)fr ds

ds lfØ; lg;ksx ls laxfBr ,oa lqO;ofLFkr i)fr ds

vuqlkj vuqlaèkku lEcfUèkr dk;Z&dyki dk lapkyu

vuqlkj vuqlaèkku lEcfUèkr dk;Z&dyki dk lapkyu

vuqlkj vuqlaèkku lEcfUèkr dk;Z&dyki dk lapkyu

vuqlkj vuqlaèkku lEcfUèkr dk;Z&dyki dk lapkyu

vuqlkj vuqlaèkku lEcfUèkr dk;Z&dyki dk lapkyu

dj jgh gS rFkk vuqlaèkku ls izkIr ekSfyd miyfCèk

dj jgh gS rFkk vuqlaèkku ls izkIr ekSfyd miyfCèk

dj jgh gS rFkk vuqlaèkku ls izkIr ekSfyd miyfCèk

dj jgh gS rFkk vuqlaèkku ls izkIr ekSfyd miyfCèk

dj jgh gS rFkk vuqlaèkku ls izkIr ekSfyd miyfCèk

rFkk vkfo"dkj fcØh ;ksX; gSA

rFkk vkfo"dkj fcØh ;ksX; gSA

rFkk vkfo"dkj fcØh ;ksX; gSA

rFkk vkfo"dkj fcØh ;ksX; gSA

rFkk vkfo"dkj fcØh ;ksX; gSA Je U;k;ky; us HkkSfrd

vuqlaUèkku iz;ksx’kkyk dks **m|ksx**

**m|ksx**

**m|ksx**

**m|ksx**

**m|ksx** gksus dh voèkkj.kk O;Dr

djus esa ekuuh; xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky; }kjk HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku

HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku

HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku

HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku

HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku

iz;ksx’kkyk

iz;ksx’kkyk

iz;ksx’kkyk

iz;ksx’kkyk

iz;ksx’kkyk ,EiykbZt ;wfu;u cuke ,-,u- jke ¼fo’ks"k flfoy

vkosnu la[;k 1082@79½ esa nh xbZ fofèk O;oLFkk dk Hkh

vuqlj.k fd;k ftl fu.kZ; esa ekuuh; xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky;

us ;g izs{k.k fd;k gS fd cSaxyksj okVj lIykbZ ,oa flojst cksMZ

cuke ,- jktIik ds ekeys esa nh xbZ O;oLFkk ds vuqlkj bl

lUns’k dh dksbZ xqUtkbZ’k ugha gS fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk]

vgenkckn esa dk;Zjr deZpkjhx.k

deZpkjhx.k

deZpkjhx.k

deZpkjhx.k

deZpkjhx.k vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e

ds vUrxZr **deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk

**deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk

**deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk

**deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk

**deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk esa vk,axsA Je U;k;ky;

vgenkckn us ;g voèkkfjr fd;k fd izR;FkhZ us 1948 ls ysdj

1976 rd ,d yEch vofèk ds fy, rduhdh in ij dk;Z fd;k

blfy, mls iz’kklfud in ij dk;Z djrs gq, O;fDr dh laKk

ugha nh tkuh pkfg, Fkh D;kasfd vius dk;Zdky ds vfUre fnuksa

esa mldk LFkkukUrj.k iz’kklfud in ij fd;k x;k Fkk ftl

le; mldh mez 58 o"kZ iwjh gks jgh FkhA mDr ifjfLFkfr esa Je

U;k;ky; us voèkkfjr fd;k fd izR;FkhZ 60 lky dh mez rd

lsok esa cus jgus dk gdnkj gS rFkk izR;FkhZ dks lsokfuo`fRr fd;s

tkus dk vkns’k fofèk fo#) ?kksf"kr fd;k vkSj ;g Hkh voèkkfjr

fd;k fd og vius in ij iquLFkZkiuk ds lkFk iwjh osru Hkh ikus

dk gdnkj gS ysfdu pwafd 60 lky dh mez iwjh gks pqdh Fkh

blfy, nks o"kZ dh vofèk dk osru fn;s tkus dk vkns’k ikfjr

fd;k x;kA vihykFkhZ HkkSfrd vuqlaUèkku iz;ksx’kkyk us lhèks

ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds lkeus vihy izLrqr dh D;ksafd

ekuuh; xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky;

xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky;

xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky;

xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky;

xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky; us ;g n`"Vhdks.k viuk;k

n`"Vhdks.k viuk;k

n`"Vhdks.k viuk;k

n`"Vhdks.k viuk;k

n`"Vhdks.k viuk;k

Fkk fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh

Fkk fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh

Fkk fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh

Fkk fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh

Fkk fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh

ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gSA

ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gSA

ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gSA

ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gSA

ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gSA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us ;g

voèkkfjr fd;k fd fdlh Hkh i{kdkj dk ;g dFku ugha gS fd

HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk ,slh xfrfofèk esa layXu gS ftls

m|e] okf.kT;deZ ;k fuekZ.k dgk tk ldsA ekuuh; loksZPp

U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh voèkkfjr fd;k] “Neither from the nature

of its organization nor from the nature and character of the

activity carried on by it, it can be said to be an ‘undertaking’

analogous to business or trade. It is not engaged in a

commercial industrial activity and in cannot be described

as an economic venture or a commercial enterprise as it is

6296

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

not its object to produce and distribute services which

would satisfy wants and needs of the consumer

community. It is more an institution discharging

Governmental functions and a domestic enterprise than a

commercial enterprise. We are, therefore, of the opinion

that PRL is not an ‘industry’ even though it is carrying on

the activity of research in a systematic manner with the

help of its employees as it lacks that element which would

make it an organisation carrying on an activity which can

be said to be analogous to the carrying on of a trade or

business because it is not producing and distributing

services which are intended or meant for satisfying human

wants and needs, as ordinarily understood.” ekuuh; loksZPp

U;k;ky; us rn~uqlkj HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk dh vihy

Lohdkj dh rFkk fo}ku Je U;k;ky; vgenkckn }kjk ikfjr

iapkV dks fujLr fd;kA

30-

1988 lqizhe dksVZ dslst ¼,y- ,.M ,l-½ i`"B 892 fel

,- lqUnjecky & ;kph cuke xksok neu ,oa fnm ljdkj ,oa

vU; & izR;FkhZx.k esa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us ;g voèkkfjr

fd;k gS fd vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk 2 ¼,l½

esa ifjHkkf"kr **deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk ls **vè;kid** vkPNkfnr

ugha gS ysfdu èkkjk 2 ¼ts½ esa ifjHkkf"kr **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk ls

**’kS{kf.kd laLFkku** vkPNkfnr gaSA fel ,-lqUnjecky cuke

xksok neu ,oa fnm ljdkj ,ao vU; ds ekeys esa vihykfFkZuh

izR;FkhZ ds fo|ky; esa ,d vè;kid ds :Ik esa fu;qDr Fkh ftldh

lsok,a fo|ky; ds izcUèku ds }kjk i= fnukafdr 25-4-1975 ds

ekè;e ls lekIr dj nh xbZA lsoklekfIr dk vkns’k lekIr

djkus esa vusd iz;klksa ds foQy gksus ds ckn vkS|ksfxd fookn

vfèkfu;e ds vUrxZr vihykfFkZuh us **lqyg vfèkdkjh** ds le{k

vkS|ksfxd fookn mBk;kA lqyg le>kSrk dh dk;Zokgh lQy

ugha gqbZA ;g ikdj fd vihykFkhZuh deZdkj dh ifjHkk"kk ls

vkPNkfnr ugha gS ljdkj us vihykfFkZuh ds ekeys dks Je

U;k;ky; esa fu.kZ;kFkZ Hkstus ls euk dj fn;kA blds ckn

vihykFkhZuh us ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; eqEcbZ dh i.kth ihB]

xksok ds le{k fjV ;kfpdk izLrqr dh vkSj ;g ;kpuk dh fd

'kklu dks fufnZ"V fd;k tk; fd mlds ekeys dks Je U;k;ky;

ds le{k izsf"kr djs rkfd mldh lsok lekfIr ds vkns’k fd

oS|rk dk fu.kZ; gks ldsA ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us vihykfFkZuh

dh fjV ;kfpdk fujLr dh vkSj ;g voèkkfjr fd;k fd

vihykfFkZuh **deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr ugha Fkh

ftlls {kqCèk gksdj vihykfFkZuh us ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds

le{k vihy izLrqr dhA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds le{k

fu.kZ;kFkZ fuEu nks iz’u vorfjr gq, %&

¼1½

D;k og fo|ky; ftlesa vihykfFkZuh dk;Zjr Fkh og

**m|ksx** Fkk \

¼2½

D;k vihykfFkZuh **deZdkj** Fkh rFkk ml **m|ksx** esa

fu;qDr Fkh \

ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us cSaxyksj okVj lIykbZ ,oa

flojst cksMZ cuke vkj-jktIik lfgr vius vusd iwoZ fu.kZ;ksa dk

lanHkZ ysrs gq, ;g voèkkfjr fd;k fd ’kS{kf.kd laLFkku ftlesa

vihykfFkZuh dk;Zjr Fkh og **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr

FkkA vihykfFkZuh ds lanHkZ esa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us fu.kZ;

ds izLrj 10 esa ;g voèkkfjr fd;k gS fd vihykfFkZuh **deZdkj**

ugha FkhA bl izdkj ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us ekuuh; mPp

U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; dh iqf"V dhA

31-

mDr fofèk O;oLFkk ls ;g Li"V gS fd foi{kh dh laLFkk

ij vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e ds izkfoèkku ykxw gksrs gS vkSj

lkslk;Vht jftLVs~’ku vfèkfu;e 1860 dk dksbZ izkfoèkku bl

eqdnesa dh lquokbZ ds lEcUèk esa bl U;k;ky; dh vfèkdkfjrk

dks izHkkfor ugha djrk gSA

32-

fgekU’kq dqekj fo|kFkhZ ,oa vU; &;kph] cuke fcgkj jkT;

,ao vU;& izR;FkhZx.k] esa mHk;i{k }kjk LohÑr rF;ksa ds vuqlkj

;kph la[;k ,d fnukad 1-8-88 dks lgk;d ds in ij] ;kph

la[;k nks fnukad 10-11-89 dks MªkbZoj ds in ij rFkk ;kph

la[;k 3 yxk;r 5 pijklh ds in ij 31-5-87 vkSj 22-4-92 dks]

dks&vkWijsfVo Vªsfuax Ldwy] nso?kj esa fizfUliy }kjk nSfud

osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa fu;qDr fd, x,A mudh lsok;sa fizfUliy

}kjk lekIr dj nh x;h ftlls {kqCèk gksdj mUgksaus ekuuh;

mPp U;k;ky; esa ;kfpdk izLrqr dhA ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;

dh ,dyihB us ;kphx.k dh ;kfpdk fujLr dh ftldh iqf"V

ekuuh; [k.MihB }kjk dh x;hA ekuuh; [k.MihB ds fu.kZ;

ls {kqCèk gksdj ;kphx.k us ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds le{k

fo’ks"k vuqefr ;kfpdk bl vkèkkj ij izLrqr dh fd vkS|ksfxd

fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk 25 (,Q) ds mya?ku esa mudh

lsok;as lekIr dh x;h gSa vr% ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds

le{k ;g iz’u fopkj.kh; Fkk fd D;k ;g dgk tk ldrk gS fd

;kphx.k dh **NVuh** dj nh x;h gS tSlkfd èkkjk 25 (,Q)

vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 esa dgk x;k gS \ lEcfUèkr

rF; ,oa ifjfLFkfr;ksa ds ewY;kaduksijkUr ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky;

us ;g ik;k fd vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 ds vUrxZr

mudh lsokeqfDr **NVuh** ugha FkhA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky;

us ;g voèkkfjr fd;k] “every Department of the Government

cannot be treated to be ‘industry’. When the appointments

are regulated by the statutory rules, the concept of

‘industry’ to that extent stands excluded. Admittedly, they

were not appointed to the post in accordance with the

rules but were engaged on the basis of need of the work.

They are temporary employees working on daily wages.

Under these circumstances, their disengagement from

service cannot be construed to be a retrenchment under

the Industrial Disputes Act. The concept of ‘retrenchment’

therefore, cannot be stretched to such an extent as to cover

these employees. The learned counsel for the petitioners

seeks to contend that in the High Court, the petitioners did

not contend that it is a case of retrenchment but termination

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6297

of their services is arbitrary. Since they are only daily-wage

employees and have no right to the posts, their

disengagement is not arbitrary. The special leave petition

is accordingly dismissed.” bl ekeys esa ekuuh; mPp

U;k;ky; ,oa lokZsPp U;k;ky; us dks&vkWijsfVo Vsªfuax Ldwy

dks **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk esa 'kkfey gksus ds fy, vuqIk;qDr

ik;kA

33-

izkFkhZ i{k dh rjQ ls izLrqr n`"VkUr 2008 osLVuZ ykW

dslst ¼jktLFkku½] ;w-lh- i`"B 730 jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky;]

¼tksèkiqj½ ¼[k.MihB½] jkT; ,oa vU; cuke fxfjjkt izLkkn ,oa

vU; esa ekuuh; jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; ¼tksèkiqj½ }kjk nh

x;h fofèk O;oLFkk dk mYys[k fd;k tkuk Hkh izklafxd gS ftlesa

ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us ;g voèkkfjr fd;k gS fd va’kdkyhu

deZpkjh Hkh èkkjk 25&,Q vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e ds ykHk dk

gdnkj gSA

34-

i{kdkjksa }kjk izLrqr cgl mDr fofèkd n`"VkUrksa esa nh

x;h fofèkd O;oLFkk rFkk orZeku ekeys dh rF; ,oa ifjfLFkfr

dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, eSa bl fu"d"kZ ij gw¡ fd foi{kh dk laLFkku

,d 'kS{kf.kd laLFkku gS tks **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr

gS vkSj izkFkhZ fufoZokn :Ik ls deZdkj dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr

gS tSlk fd ekuuh; jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; us ;g voèkkfjr

fd;k gSA rn~uqlkj bl U;k;kfèkdj.k dks mHk;i{k ds chp

mRiUu fookn ls lEcfUèkr orZeku ekeys dh lquokbZ dk

{ks=kfèkdkj izkIr gSA

35-

foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls izkjfEHkd vkifRr esa ;g mYys[k

fd;k x;k fd izkFkhZ us uoksn; fo|ky; lfefr dks i{kdkj ugha

cuk;k gS blfy;s vko’;d i{kdkjksa ds vla;kstu ds dkj.k okn

fujLr gksus ;ksX; gS ftlds fo#) izkFkhZ i{k dk tokc gS fd

fu;kstd dks i{kdkj cuk;k x;k gS vkSj tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;

lfefr dks Hkh i{kdkj cuk;k x;k gS blfy, vla;kstu dk nks"k

ugha gSA bl lUnHkZ esa mYys[kuh; gS fd fofèk dh ;g lqLFkkfir

O;oLFkk gS fd fdlh Hkh U;k;ky; ds le{k fopkjkèkhu okn esa

og O;fDr vko’;d i{kdkj gS ftlds vHkko esa izHkkfor fMØh

ikfjr ugha dh tk ldrhA orZeku ekeys esa ,slh fLFkfr ugha gS]

vr% foi{k ds i{kdkjksa ds vla;kstu ds lEcUèk esa izLrqr dFku

esa dksbZ cy ugha gSA

36-

foi{k dh rjQ ls ;g izkjfEHkd vkifRr Hkh mBkbZ xbZ gS

fd bl ekeys esa lquokbZ dk {ks=kfèkdkj iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k dks

gS vkSj izkFkhZ }kjk mBk;k x;k fookn vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e

dh ifjfèk esa ugha vkrk gSA mijksDr izLrjksa dh O;k[;k esa ;g

voèkkfjr fd;k x;k gS fd ekeyk vkS|ksfxd fookn gS vkSj bl

U;k;kfèkdj.k dks bl ekeys esa lquokbZ dk {ks=kfèkdkj izkIr gSA

iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k vfèkfu;e 1985 ds fdlh izkfoèkku esa bl

U;k;kfèkdj.k ds {ks=kfèkdkj dks izHkkfor ugha fd;k x;k gSA èkkjk

14 ¼2½ iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k vfèkfu;e 1985 esa ,slh dksbZ

O;oLFkk ugha gS ftlls bl voèkkj.kk dks cy feys fd orZeku

ekeysa esa bl U;k;kfèkdj.k dks lquokbZ dk vfèkdkj izkIr ugha

gS] vr% foi{k dh bl izkjfEHkd vkifRr esa dksbZ cy ugha gSA

37-

tgka rd la’kksfèkr jsQjsUl ds vuqlkj izkFkhZ Jh gjhizlkn

tks’kh ds fnukad 13-7-96 ls 14-7-2005 rd dk;Zjr jgus dk

iz’u gS izkFkhZ us ;kfpdk esa izLrj 2 esa ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd

mldh fu;qfDr fnukad 13-7-96 dks fjDr in ij gqbZ Fkh] ysfdu

dksbZ fu;qfDr i= ugha fn;k x;k FkkA oknksÙkj esa ;g mYys[k

fd;k x;k gS fd rnFkZ vkèkkj ij nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa

fu;fer deZpkjh ds miyCèk gksus rd ds fy, og fu;ksftr

fd;k x;k FkkA izkFkhZ dh fu;qfDr fnukad 13-7-96 dks gqbZ bl

rF; dks oknksÙkj esa Li"V :Ik ls bUdkj ugha fd;k x;k gSA

foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls izLrqr vfHkys[k tks ;kph dh vkosnu

fnukad 11-11-2010 ds vuqikyu esa izLrqr fd;k x;k gS mlesa

tqykbZ esa mifLFkfr iaftdk dh izfr ds voyksdu ls ;g tkfgj

gS fd izkFkhZ fnukad 13-7-96 dks mifLFkr n’kkZ;k x;k gS blls

izkFkhZ ds bl dFku ds iqf"V gksrh gS fd fnukad 13-7-96 dks og

dk;Z ij j[kk x;k ;|fi mls dksbZ fyf[kr fu;qfDr i= ugha

fn;k x;kA izkFkhZ+ us izfrijh{kk esa ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd mls

dksbZ fu;qfDr i= ugha fn;k x;k Fkk rFkk bl lEcUèk esa dksbZ

fyf[kr vkns’k Hkh ugha fn;k x;k FkkA Jh lqèkhj pUnz è;kuh]

izkpk;Z] tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] Nku] ftyk Vksad us lk{; esa

viuk 'kiFk i= izLrqr fd;k gS vkSj izfrijh{kk esa ;g dgk gS

fd fnukad 13-7-96 ls izkFkhZ us dk;Z ij vkuk 'kq: fd;k Fkk ;k

ugha] bldh tkudkjh mUgsa ugha gS] ijUrq mYys[kuh; gS fd

foi{k dh rjQ ls izLrqr mifLFkfr iaftdk dh QksVksizfr ls ;g

Li"V gS fd fnukad 13-7-96 dks izkFkhZ mifLFkfr iaftdk esa

mifLFkr n’kkZ;k x;k gS rFkk 60 #- izfrfnu dh nj ls dqy 15

fnu dk;Z djus ds fy, mldks 900 #- dk Hkqxrku fd;k x;k

gS rFkk izkFkhZ ds uke ds le{k ekg tqykbZ 1996 dk Hkqxrku izkIr

djus ds lEcUèk esa mlds gLrk{kj gSA izn’kZ&MCY;w 3 izkFkhZ dh

rjQ ls fnukad 17-7-2008 ds vkosnu ds ekè;e ls izLrqr

vfHkys[k gS ftlesa tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] Nku] ds izkpk;Z

}kjk fnukad 27-12-1996 dks fuxZr izek.k&i= esa fnukad 13-7-

1996 ls 60 #- izfrfnu dh nj ls izkFkhZ ds pkyd ds :Ik esa

dk;Zjr jgus dk mYys[k fd;k x;k gSA mDr izek.k&i= dk

mYys[k izkFkhZ us vius 'kiFk&i= esa fd;k gS rFkk fu;qfDr dh

frfFk dk Hkh mYys[k fd;k gSA foi{k dh rjQ ls mDr izek.k&i=

ftlesa ;kph ds fnukad 13-7-96 ls MªkbZoj ds :Ik esa dk;Z djus

dk mYys[k gS] mlds fo#) ,slh dksbZ lkjoku izfrijh{kk ugha

dh xbZ gS ftlds vkèkkj ij mDr izek.k&i= dks lkjghu ;k

xyr ekuk tk,A izfrijh{kk esa izkFkhZ us izkjEHk esa gh ;g mYys[k

fd;k gS fd fnukad 13-7-96 dks mldh fu;qfDr fizfUliy]

fllksfn;k }kjk dh x;h FkhA izn’kZ&3 Hkh Jh th-,l- fllksfn;k]

izkpk;Z }kjk fuxZr dh x;h gSA mDr m)`r izys[kksa rFkk mHk;

i{kksa ds lk{;ksa dh izfrijh{kk ds lE;d voyksdu ,oa fo’ys"k.k

ls eSa bl fu"d"kZ ij gw¡ fd izkFkhZ fd fu;qfDr foi{kh laLFkku esa

fnukad 13-7-96 dks gqbZ FkhA

6298

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

38-

Tkgk¡ rd izkFkhZ }kjk fnukad 13-7-96 ls 14-7-2005 rd

dk;Zjr jgus dk iz’u gS vkSj ,d o"kZ esa 240 fnu rd dk;Zjr

jgus dk iz’u gS bl lUnHkZ esa izkFkhZ ds fo}ku vfèkoDrk dh rjQ

ls ;g cgl dh x;h gS fd izkFkhZ us o"kZ esa 240 fnu fu;fer :Ik

ls dk;Z fd;k gS] ;g cgl Hkh dh x;h gS fd foi{k }kjk lEcfUèkr

vfHkys[k izLrqr ugha fd, x, gSa ftlls izkFkhZ ds fujUrj dk;Z

djus ds lEcUèk esa tkudkjh fey lds vr% bl lEcUèk esa foi{k

ds fo#) U;k;kfèkdj.k }kjk izfrdwy voèkkj.kk xzg.k djuh

pkfg,A bl lEcUèk esa ;kph i{k }kjk fofèkd n`"VkUr 2007 ,-

vkbZ-vkj-] ,l-lh-MCY;w- i`"B 1712 eSllZ Jhjke b.MLVªh;y

,UVjizkbtst cuke egd flag ,oa vU; dk voyEc fy;k x;k

gSA blds fo#) foi{khx.k fo}ku vfèkoDrk dh rjQ ls ;g

cgl dh x;h gS fd izkFkhZ us ,d o"kZ rd fujUrj dk;Z fd;k

gS vkSj ,d o"kZ dh vofèk esa 240 fnu dk;Z vofèk jgh gS] bl

rF; dks fl) djus dk Hkkj Loa; ;kph i{k ij gSA foi{k }kjk

vius leFkZu esa fofèkd n`"VkUr jsUt QkWjsLV vkWfQlj cuke ,l-

Vh- gkfnekuh dk voyEc fy;k x;k gS ;g cgl Hkh dh x;h gS

fd ;kph }kjk eqdnesa ds nkSjku izkFkhZ dh vkosnu fnukafdr

11-11-2010 ds vuqlkj tks vfHkys[k dk;Z djus dh vofèk ds

lEcUèk esa ekaxs x;s gSa og foi{k }kjk i=koyh ij izLrqr dj fn;s

x;s gSa vkSj foi{k }kjk izLrqr vfHkys[kksa esa izkFkhZ ds dk;Z djus

vkSj Hkqxrku ds lEcUèk esa tks fooj.k vafdr gS mlds vfrfjDr

izkFkhZ us foi{kh ds ;gka dk;Z ugha fd;kA tgk¡ rd izkFkhZ ds

vkosnu fnukad 11-11-2010 esa ;kfpr vfHkys[kksa dk iz’u gS bl

lUnHkZ esa mYys[kuh; gS fd izkFkhZ us ;g ekax dh gS fd og

fnukad 13-7-96 ls 15-7-2005 rd fujUrj dk;Zjr jgk gS vkSj

,d dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu dke fd;k gS rFkk mldh gktjh

foi{khx.k }kjk ykWx&cqd esa dh tkrh Fkh tks foi{khx.k ds dCts

esa jgrh Fkh vkSj izkFkhZ dks ekfld osru okmPkj }kjk fn;k tkrk

Fkk] vr% ykWx&cqd vkSj okmpj foi{k }kjk U;k;ky; ds le{k

izLrqr djk;k tk,A bl vkosnu ds vuqikyu esa fnukad

21-2-2011 dks foi{k }kjk vfHkys[k izLrqr fd;k x;k gS vkSj izkFkhZ

ds fo}ku izfrfufèk }kjk fnukad 9-8-2011 dks U;k;kfèkdj.k ds

le{k ;g Lohdkj fd;k x;k gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk okfUNr nLrkost

fnukad 06&04&11 dks izLrqr dj fn;k x;k gSA izkFkhZ i{k }kjk

izLrqr vfHkys[kksa ds fo#) dksbZ vkifRr ugha fd x;h gS fd dksbZ

okfUNr vfHkys[k foi{k }kjk jksd j[kk x;k gSA fnukad 21-2-11]

26-4-2011 vkSj fnukad 9-8-2011 ds vkns’k rkfydk ds voyksdu

ls mDr rF; Li"V gSA mDr rF; ,oa ifjfLFkfr esa izkFkhZ i{k

ds fy, ;g dgus ds fy, dksbZ xqUtkb’k ugha gS fd foi{k us

izkFkhZ dh mifLFkfr] dk;Z djus ds vofèk vFkok Hkqxrku ls

lEcfUèkr okfUNr vfHkys[k ugha izLrqr fd, gSa vkSj mUgsa jksd

j[kk gSA tgka rd ykWx&cqd izLrqr djus dk iz’u gS Hkqxrku

dk fooj.k ;g n’kkZrk gS fd Hkqxrku gsrq dk;Z fnolksa dk

vkx.ku ykWx&cqd ij gh vkèkkfjr gS ftldh iqf"V vfHkys[k

bZ-,e-&4 ls gksrh gSA

39-

foi{k dh rjQ ls izkFkhZ }kjk foi{k ds laLFkku esa dk;Z

djus ls lEcfUèkr tks mifLFkfr iaftdk vkSj Hkqxrku fooj.k ,oa

okmpj izLrqr fd;k x;k gS og fuEu izdkj gS % &

ekg

dk;Z fd, x,

vuqifLFkr

fnukas dh la[;k

$ vodk’k

13 ls 31 tqykbZ 96

15 $ 4 ¾ 19

vxLr 96

27 $ 4 ¾ 31

flrEcj 96

25 $ 5 ¾ 30

vDVwcj 96

27 $ 4 ¾ 31

uoEcj 96

26 $ 4 ¾ 30

fnlEcj 96

26 $ 5 ¾ 31

tuojh 97

04 $ 0 ¾ 4

Qjojh ls 7 fnlEcj 97

-------------------------

vuqifLFkr

fnlEcj 97

21 $ 3 ¾ 24

tuojh 98 ls Qjojh 98

-------------------------

vuqifLFkr

ekpZ 98

24 $ 6 ¾ 30

vizsy 98

25 $ 5 ¾ 30

ebZ 98 ls 17 vxLr 98

-------------------------

vuqifLFkr

vxLr 98

12 $ 2 ¾ 14

4]7]8]9]13]17]20]30 flrEcj 98

22 $ 2 ¾ 24

vDVwcj o uoEcj 98

-------------------------

vuqifLFkr

fnlEcj 98

23 $ 2 ¾ 25 6 fnu

tuojh 99

26 $ 5 ¾ 31

Qjojh 99

24 $ 4 ¾ 28

ekpZ 99

25 $ 6 ¾ 31

vizsy 99 ls Qjojh 2003

-------------------------

vuqifLFkr

ekpZ 2003

3 $ 0 ¾ 3

28 fnu

vizsy 03 ls fnlEcj 04

-------------------------

vuqifLFkr

tuojh 2005

04 $ 00 ¾ 4 fnu

Qjojh 05

-------------------------

vuqifLFkr

ekpZ 05

02 $ 00 ¾ 2 fnu

vizSy 05

01 $ 00 ¾ 1 fnu

ebZ 05

05 $ 00 ¾ 5 fnu

twu 05

-------------------------

vuqifLFkr

tqykbZ 05

14 $ 00 ¾ 14 fnu

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6299

¼ekpZ 99 rd fooj.k gkftjh jftLVj ij vkèkkfjr gS rFkk 'ks"k

Hkqxrku okmpj ij vkèkkfjr gSA ftl ekg esa vodk’k ds fnu

dk;Z fnolksa dh la[;k esa ugha tksM+k x;k gS ml ekg esa vkosnd

dh gkftjh yxkrkj ugha gS vFkok cgqr de jgh gSA½

40-

izkFkhZ }kjk Loa; lgk;d Je vk;qDr egksn; ¼dsUnzh;½]

dksVk ds le{k vius dk;Z vofèk dk fooj.k izLrqr fd;k x;k

gS tks LokHkkfod :Ik ls izkFkhZ dks Lohdkj gSA ;g vkosnu

fnukafdr 6-2-2006 gS ftlesa izkFkhZ us dk;Z vofèk dk fooj.k

fuEu izdkj fn;k gS %&

** ;g fd vizkFkhZ chp&chp esa izkFkhZ dks dk;Z ugha nsrk Fkk

ijUrq izkFkhZ us 12 dyS.Mj ekg esa 240 fnu dk;Z fd;k gS dk;Z

dk fooj.k tks izkFkhZ ds ikl miyCèk gS fuEu izdkj gS%&

13&7&96 ls 2&1&97

3&3&03 ls 8&3&03

25&5&05

10&12&97 ls 30&5&98

26&3&03 ls 30&3&03

8&6&05

31&7&98 ls 15&10&98

21&8&03 ls 22&8&03

22&6&05 ls

14&7&05

7&12&98 ls 17&3&99

26&6&04 ls 3&1&05

23&4&99 ls 28&4&99

6&1&05 ls 14&3&05

31&5&99 ls 9&6&99

2&4&05 ls 12&5&05

41-

2007 ,-vkbZ-vkj-] ,l-lh-MCY;w- i`"B 1712 eSllZ Jhjke

b.MLVªh;y ,UVjizkbtst cuke egd flag ,oa vU; esa 240 fnu

dh vofèk dh lsok dks lkfcr djus ,oa izfrdwy voèkkj.kk xzg.k

djus ds lEcUèk esa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us fu.kZ; ds izLrj

32] 33] o 34 esa ;g voèkkfjr fd;k gS %&

**32- The said approach in our view was erroneous in

view of the decision of this Court in the case of U.P.

Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Company Ltd. (Supra).

The petitioner had wrongly described the documents

relating to attendance for the years 1991 onwards as

far as the respondents are concerned, as being

irrelevant and the Tribunal has also accepted the

said reasoning. Consequently, instead of drawing

an adverse presumption for non-production of the

said records, the Tribunal accepted the contention

of the petitioner that the workmen had not worked

for more than 240 days in the year preceding the date

of their termination nor had the workmen filed any

proof to show otherwise.

33. In our view, the High Court adopted the correct

approach while deciding the controversy between

the parties upon a correct understanding of the law

as contained in Section 6 N read with Section 2 (g) of

the U.P. Act which is applicable to these petitions.

34. Having correctly interpreted the provisions of

Section 6 N of the U.P. Act, the High Court rightly

drew an adverse presumption for non-production of

the attendance Registers and the Muster Roll for the

years 1991 onwards. The best evidence having been

withheld, the High Court was entitled to draw such

adverse inference. The view expressed by this Court

on the question of burden of proof in Range Forest

Officer’s case (supra) were watered down by the

subsequent decision in R.M. Yellatty’s case (supra)

and in our view the workmen had discharged their

initial onus by production of the document in their

possession”.

42-

tgka rd orZeku ekeys esa foi{khx.k ds fo#) èkkjk 114

Hkkjrh; lk{; vfèkfu;e ds vUrxZr izfrdwy voèkkj.kk xzg.k

fd, tkus dk iz’u gS bl lUnHkZ esa mYys[kuh; gS fd U;k;kfèkdj.k

ds le{k vfHkys[kksa dh izLrqfr ls lEcfUèkr ;kph dh ekax vkSj

foi{kh }kjk dh x;h iwfrZ ds ckn dksbZ vkifÙk ugha dh x;h gS

fd veqd vofèk ds fy, gkftjh jftLVj vFkok Hkqxrku okmpj

foi{kh }kjk izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gS cfYd rRdkyhu fo}ku

ihBklhu vfèkdkjh us vkns’k fnukad 9-8-2011 esa ;g mYys[k

fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ ds izfrfufèk dk dguk gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk okfUNr

nLrkost fnukad 6-4-2011 ¼lgh frfFk 21-2-11½ dks izLrqr gks

pqdh gSA bl lEcUèk esa fnuakd 9-8-2011 ds vkns’k dks bl Lrj

ij m)`r djuk eSa vko’;d le>rk gw¡ tks fuEuor gS % &

**mHk;i{k ds izfrfufèkx.k mifLFkrA izkFkhZ us fnukad

11-11-2010 dks ,d vkosnu vizkFkhZ ls nLrkostkr izLrqr djokus

gsrq izLrqr fd;kA izkFkhZ ds izfrfufèkx.k dk dguk gS fd izkFkhZ

}kjk okfUNr nLrkostkr fnukad 6-4-2011 dks is’k gks pqds gSaA

vr% mDr izkFkZuk&i= dk fuLrkj.k mDr izdkj fd;k tkrk gSA

izkFkhZ dk 'kiFk&i= lk{; esa izLrqr fd;kA izfr vizkFkhZ dks

izfr nh xbZA ftjg gsrq volj pkgkA i=koyh okLrs ftjg

fnukad 29-9-2011 dks is’k gksA**

43-

1963 ii L.L.J. i`"B 367] ,l-lh-lh- ¼iw.kZihB½ lwj bukesy

,.M LVSfEiax oDlZ fyfeVsM cuke deZpkjhx.k esa ekuuh;

loksZPp U;k;ky; us vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk

25&ch ,oa 25&,Q dh O;k[;k djrs gq, ;g voèkkfjr fd;k gS

fd ¼,d o"kZ yxkrkj lsok½ ls ;g rkRi;Z gS fd iwjh ,d dSys.Mj

o"kZ ls de lsok vofèk ugha gksuh pkfg, vkSj deZpkjh us ;fn

dsoy X;kjg ekg rd lsok dh gS ftlesa mlus 240 fnu ls Hkh

T;knk dk;Z dj fy;k gS rks Hkh ,slh fLFkfr esa og èkkjk 25&,Q

vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e ds ykHk dk gdnkj ugha gksxkA

44-

jsUt QkWjsLV vkWfQlj cuke ,l- Vh- gkfnekuh esa ekuuh;

loksZPp U;k;ky; us fu.kZ; ds izLrj 3 esa ;g voèkkfjr fd;k

gS “ In our opinion the tribunal was not right in placing the

onus on the management without first determining on the

basis of cogent evidence that the respondent had worked

for more than 240 days in the year preceding his termination.

It was the case of the claimant that he had so worked but

this claim was denied by the appellant. It was then for the

claimant to lead evidence to show that he had in fact worked

6300

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

for 240 days in the year preceding his termination. Filing of

an affidavit is only his own statement in his favour and

that cannot be regarded as sufficient evidence for any court

or tribunal to come to the conclusion that a workman had,

in fact, worked for 240 days in a year. No proof of receipt of

salary or wages for 240 days or order or record of

appointment or engagement for this period was produced

by the workman. On this ground alone, the award is liable

to be set aside”.

45-

foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls mDr n`"VkUr bl lUnHkZ esa izLrqr

fd;k x;k gS fd izkFkhZ us dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu fujUrj dk;Z

fd;k gS bl rF; dks fl) djus dk Hkkj Loa; ;kph i{k ij gS

izkFkhZ i{k dh rjQ ls eSllZ Jhjke b.MLVªh;y ,UVjizkbtst

cuke egd flag ,oa vU; dk n`"VkUr izkFkhZ i{k dh rjQ ls bl

mn~ns’; ds fy, izLrqr fd;k x;k gS fd foi{kh ds fo#)

vfHkys[k izLrqr u fd;k tkus ds lUnHkZ esa ;kph ds i{k esa 240

fnu fujUrj dk;Z djus ds lEcUèk esa izfrdwy voèkkj.kk xzg.k

dh tk;A eSllZ Jhjke b.MLVªh;y izkbosV fyfeVsM cuke

egd flag ,oa vU; ds ekeys esa izR;FkhZx.k us viuh ;kfpdk esa

;g mYys[k fd;k fd os 1987 ls 1991 ds chp fu;qDr gq, vkSj

fu;qfDr dh frfFk ls ysdj NaVuh rd Øe’k% lu~ 1994 ,oa

1995 rd dk;Z fd;kA ;kphx.k dk dFku Fkk ;|fi mUgksaus ,d

dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu ls T;knk dke fd;k] fQj Hkh mudh

NaVuh voSèkkfud rjhds ls èkkjk 2 ¼th½ mRrj izns’k vkS|ksfxd

fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 ds izkoèkku ds fo#) dh x;hA izR;FkhZx.k

dh dqy la[;k 5 Fkh ftuls lEcfUèkr 5 fookn U;k;kfèkdj.k dks

fu.k;kFkZ izsf"kr fd;s x;sA izR;FkhZx.k dh rjQ ls ;g Hkh dgk

x;k Fkk fd mUgsa xzsM uEcj] izkWfoMs.V Q.M uEcj dk vkcaVu

gqvk FkkA lsok lEcUèkh vU; lqfoèkk,¡ Lohdkj dh x;h Fkh vkSj

mUgksaus lsok lEcUèkh vU; ykHk dh ek¡x dh] ftlds fy, os

gdnkj Fks] blfy, mudh lsok,¡ fcuk fdlh izdkj dh uksfVl

fn, lekIr dj nh x;hA ;kph ¼izcUèku½ dk dFku Fkk fd phuh

m|ksx ,d ekSleh m|ksx gS vkSj dk;Z esa layXu vfèkdka’k

deZpkfj;ksa dh fu;qfDr vkdfLed ,oa vLFkk;h izd`fr dh gSA

izcUèku dh rjQ ls ;g Hkh dgk x;k fd okLrfod fookn lsok

dh lekfIr dk ugha Fkk cfYd izR;FkhZx.k dh fu;fefrdj.k dk

Fkk ,oa izR;FkhZx.k dh lsok,¡ dHkh lekIr ugha dh x;h] D;ksafd

fdlh Hkh izR;FkhZ us dfFkr lsok lekfIr fd frfFk ds Bhd iwoZ 12

eghuksa esa 240 fnu dke ugha fd;kA izR;FkhZx.k us vius leFkZu

esa cksul iphZ] osru iphZ] izkfoMs.V ls lEcfUèkr dVkSrh dh iphZ]

fofHkUu efguksa ls lEcfUèkr mifLFkfr dkMZ vkSj vU; miyCèk

vfHkys[k izLrqr fd;k Fkk vkSj izcUèku ls mifLFkfr iaftdk]

cksul Hkqxrku ls lEcfUèkr vfHkys[k vkSj viuh lsok ls lEcfUèkr

vU; vfHkys[k izLrqr djus dh izkFkZuk dh FkhA izcUèku }kjk lsok

lekfIr ds Bhd iwoZ 12 eghus dh vofèk ¼,d dSys.Mj o"kZ½ dh

mifLFkfr iaftdk ls lEcfUèkr vfHkys[k izLrqr fd;k x;k Fkk]

ftlls ;g tkfgj Fkk fd ml vofèk esa fdlh Hkh deZpkjh }kjk

240 fnu dke ugha fd;k x;k FkkA izcUèku }kjk 'ks"k foxr vofèk

dh mifLFkfr iaftdk u izLrqr djus dk dksbZ vdkV~; dkj.k

ugha n’kkZ;k x;k FkkA izR;FkhZx.k dks U;k;kfèkdj.k }kjk f}rh;d

lk{; izLrqr djus dh vuqefr iznku dh x;hA U;k;kfèkdj.k us

izR;FkhZx.k dh ;kfpdk,¡ bl vkèkkj ij fujLr dh] fd fdlh Hkh

izR;FkhZ us ,d dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu lsok ugha dhA izcUèku

}kjk mifLFkfr ls lEcfUèkr 'ks"k vofèk ls lEcfUèkr vfHkys[k u

izLrqr djus ds fcUnqvksa ij U;k;kfèkdj.k }kjk bl vkèkkj ij

fo’ks"k egRo ugha fn;k x;k fd izcUèku }kjk vLFkk;h deZpkfj;ksa

ls lEcfUèkr ,sls vfHkys[kksa dk j[k&j[kko ugha fd;k tkrkA

46-

mRrj izns’k vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e dh èkkjk 2&th esa

;g izkfoèkku gS fd lsok lekfIr fd frfFk ds Bhd iwoZ dSys.Mj

o"kZ esa 240 fnu dh lsok djus dh ctk;] fdlh Hkh dSys.Mj o"kZ

esa lsok ds nkSjku ;fn deZpkjh us 240 fnu dh lsok dh gS rks

mldh NaVuh fcuk uksfVl fn;s ugha dh tk ldrhA rn~uqlkj

U;k;kfèkdj.k ds fu.kZ; ds fo#) izR;FkhZx.k us ekuuh; mPp

U;k;ky; ds le{k vyx&vyx fjV ;kfpdk,¡ izLrqr dhA

izcUèku }kjk dsoy lsok lekfIr dh frfFk ds Bhd iwoZ dSys.Mj

o"kZ dh mifLFkfr iaftdk izLrqr dh x;h Fkh vkSj 'ks"k vofèk ls

lEcfUèkr iaftdk izLrqr ugha dh x;h Fkh ftl vofèk esa izR;FkhZx.k

us lsok dh FkhA èkkjk 6&,u ds izkfoèkku ds vuqlkj 240 fnu dh

lsok fdlh Hkh dSys.Mj o"kZ esa èkkjk 2&th ds mn~ns’; ds fy,

i;kZIr FkhA vr% 'ks"k vofèk ls lEcfUèkr vfHkys[kksa ds izLrqr u

gksus ds dkj.k ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us Hkkjrh; lk{; vfèkfu;e

1872 dh èkkjk 114 ds vUrxZr izcUèku ds fo#) izfrdwy

voèkkj.kk xzg.k dh rFkk lHkh fjV ;kfpdk,¡ Lohdkj dh] ftlds

fo#) ;kph us ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds le{k fo’ks"k

vuqefr ;kfpdk izLrqr dhA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds le{k

;kph }kjk jsUt vkWfQlj cuke gkfnekuh lfgr vusd fofèkd

n`"VkUrksa dk voyEc fy;k x;kA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us

;kph dh ;kfpdk fujLr dh vkSj fu.kZ; ds izLrj 34 esa ;g

voèkkfjr fd;k %&

34. Having correctly interpreted the provisions of

Section 6 N of the U.P. Act, the High Court rightly

drew an adverse presumption for non-production of

the attendance Registers and the Muster Roll for the

years 1991 onwards. The best evidence having been

withheld, the High Court was entitled to draw such

adverse inference. The view expressed by this Court

on the question of burden of proof in Range Forest

Officer’s case (supra) were watered down by the

subsequent decision in R.M. Yellatty’s case (supra)

and in our view the workmen had discharged their

initial onus by production of the document in their

possession”.

47-

orZeku izdj.k esa fnukad 9-8-2011 ds vkns’kkuqlkj izkFkhZ

i{k us Loa; Lohdkj fd;k gS fd okfUNr vfHkys[k ftldh ek¡x

izkFkhZ i{k }kjk dh x;h gS og is’k gks pqds gSa ftldk rkRi;Z ;g

gS fd foi{khx.k ds dCts esa dksbZ vfHkys[k 'ks"k ugha jg x;k gS

ftls izLrqr gksus dh izkFkhZ i{k dks vis{kk gksA i=koyh ij

miyCèk izkFkhZ i{k dh vkosnu ds vuqikyu esa foi{kh dh rjQ

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6301

ls izLrqr vfHkys[k ds voyksdu ls ;g Li"V gS fd fu;qfDr dh

frfFk ls tqykbZ 2005 rd ds Hkqxrku okmpj ,oa mifLFkfr

iaftdk dh izfr izLrqr dh x;h gSA izkFkhZ i{k }kjk eSllZ Jhjke

b.MLVªh;y ,UVjizkbZtst cuke egd flag ,oa vU; ds ekeys

ls dksbZ enn yh tk ldrh gS] D;ksafd mDr ekeys eas foi{k us

dsoy lsokeqfDr ds Bhd iwoZ ,d lky dh vofèk dh mifLFkfr

iaftdk dk fooj.k izLrqr fd;k Fkk tcfd m- iz- vkS|ksfxd

fookn vfèkfu;e dh èkkjk 2 ¼th½ ds izkfoèkku esa **iwoZorhZ** 'kCn

dk yksi gksus ds dkj.k fdlh dyS.Mj o"kZ esa deZdkj dh 240

fnu dh lsok **yxkrkj lsok** ds mn~ns’; ls Ik;kZIr FkhA 'ks"k

vofèk ds vfHkys[k foi{k }kjk izLrqr ugha fd;s x;s Fks] vr%

ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us foi{k ds fo:) izfrdwy voèkkj.kk

xzg.k dh FkhA orZeku ekeys esa foi{k us vfHkys[k fu;qfDr ls

ysdj lsok lekfIr rd izLrqr fd;s gS] vr% èkkjk 114 Hkkjrh;

lk{; vfèkfu;e ds vUrxZr izkFkhZ ds i{k esa foi{khx.k ds fo:)

izfrdwy voèkkj.kk xzg.k djus ds dksbZ fofèkd fLFkfr mRiUu ugha

gksrh] vr% eSa bl fu"d"kZ ij gw¡ fd orZeku ekeys dh rF; ,oa

ifjfLFkfr esa izkFkhZ gfjizlkn tks’kh dks èkkjk 25&¼,Q½ vkS|ksfxd

fookn vfèkfu;e dk ykHk ugha izkIr gks ldrkA

48-

tgka rd izkFkhZ dh fu;qfDr dh izÑfr dk iz’u gS] ;kfpdk

esa mlds }kjk dgk x;k gS fd mldh fu;qfDr fjDr LFkku ij

gqbZ Fkh] ysfdu mls dksbZ fu;qfDr i= ugha feyk Fkk ftl rF;

dks oknksÙkj esa bUdkj fd;k x;k gS vkSj dgk x;k gS fd dk;Z

dh miyCèkrk ds dkj.k rnFkZ vkèkkj ij nSfud osru Hkksxh ds

:Ik esa mls fu;ksftr fd;k x;k Fkk vkSj fof’k"V :Ik ls ;g

mYys[k Hkh fd;k x;k gS fd mldh fu;qfDr fdlh in ij ugha

dh x;h FkhA izkpk;Z] Jh lqèkhj pUn è;kuh us vius 'kiFk&i=

esa mDr rF; dks nksgjk;k gSA fu;qfDr fn;s tkus ds lEcUèk esa

izfrijh{kk esa izkFkhZ us i`"B 1 ij Lohdkj fd;k gS fd izkpk;Z] us

ekSf[kd :Ik ls mls cqyk;k Fkk vkSj izkFkhZ ls fy[kok;k Fkk fd lgh

<ax ls dke djsaxs vkSj ;g fy[kok;k gqvk dkxt mUgha ds ikl

gSA ;g Hkh dgk gS fd jkstxkj dk;kZy; ls pkyd gsrq dksbZ lwph

ugha eaxokbZ FkhA ;g Hkh dgk gS fd izkpk;Z ftUgksusa izkFkhZ dks

fu;qDr fd;k muls izkFkhZ dh dksbZ O;fDrxr tkudkjh ugha gS

vkSj fo|ky; ds gh ,d fyfid izkFkhZ dks ysdj x;s Fks ysfdu

muds uke dk è;ku ugha gSA Hkqxrku ds lEcUèk esa foi{k }kjk

i=koyh ij izLrqr fooj.k ls ;g fofnr gksrk gS fd izkFkhZ tqykbZ

1996 ls 60 #- nSfud etnwjh ij fu;qDr fd;k x;k Fkk vkSj

;g nj ekpZ 1999 rd fo|eku FkhA blds ckn ekpZ 2003 esa

izkFkhZ dks 75 #- izfrfnu dh nj ls Hkqxrku fd;k x;k gS vkSj

tuojh 2005 ls lsokeqfDr rd 100 #- izfrfnu dh nj ls

Hkqxrku fd;k x;k gSA ebZ 2005 vkSj tqykbZ 05 ds Hkqxrku ds

fooj.k ls ;g tkfgj gS fd ebZ 05 esa fo|ky; ds okgu pkyd

ds vodk’k ij gksus ds dkj.k vkSj tqykbZ 05 esa fo|ky; ds

okgu pkyd ds t;iqj {ks=h; dk;kZy; esa vLFkk;h :Ik ls M;wVh

ij gksus ds dkj.k ml vofèk esa izkFkhZ dks dk;Z fn;k x;k gSA

mDr vofèk ds fy;s Hkqxrku ij izkFkhZ ds gLrk{kj gS ftl

vfHkys[k esa mDr ckr vafdr gS fd fo|ky; ds okgu pkyd

ds Øe’k% vodk’k ,oa t;iqj dk;kZy; esa M;wVh ij gksus ds

dkj.k izkFkhZ dks dk;Z ij j[kk x;k gSA izkpk;Z ds 'kiFk&i= ds

izLrj 3 esa mDr fu;qfDr dh izd`fr dk mYys[k gSA izfrijh{kk

esa Hkh izkpk;Z us dgk gS fd izkFkhZ us 2005 esa vfUre :Ik ls dke

fd;k Fkk vkSj izkFkhZ dks chp&chp esa cqykrs jgrs FksA izkFkhZ us Hkh

izfrijh{kk esa i`"B 2 ij ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd fnukad

13-7-96 ls 22-2-99 rd mlus yxkrkj dke fd;k Fkk vkSj ,d

o"kZ esa 240 fnu ls vfèkd dke fd;k Fkk ysfdu bl rF; dk

leFkZu mlds le>kSrk vfèkdkjh ds le{k 6-2-06 ds vkosnu ls

ugha gksrk gSA vkxs ;g dgk gS fd og lu~ 1999 ls 2003 ds chp

dke fd;k Fkk rFkk lu~ 2003 esa fdrus fnu dk;Z fd;k og ugha

crk ldrkA ;kfpdk esa izkFkhZ us dgk gS fd mls 09-8-99 dks

foi{kh us dk;Z nsuk cUn dj fn;k vkSj i`"B 3 ij lk{; esa ;g

dgk gS fd 9-8-99 dks foi{kh us mls lsokeqDr ugha fd;k cfYd

22-2-99 dks lsok eqDr fd;kA ;kfpdk esa vUrr% 15-7-2005 dks

vfUre ckj dk;ZeqDr gksus dk mYys[k gS ijUrq lk{; esa dgk gS

fd mls è;ku ugha gS fd 15-7-99 dks mls lsokeqDr fd;k x;k

;k ughaA izkFkhZ dh ;kfpdk esa ,slk dksbZ mYys[k ugha gS fd mlus

13-7-96 ls 22-2-99 rd yxkrkj dke fd;k cfYd ;g mYys[k

gS fd tc 9-8-99 rd ,d dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu ls vfèkd

dk;Z dj fy;k rks foi{kh us dk;Z nsuk cUn dj fn;kA bl izdkj

izkFkhZ dh ;kfpdk ds dFku vkSj izfrijh{kk esa vk;s lk{; rFkk

izLrqr 'kiFk&i= ds lk{; esa dksbZ lkE;rk ugha gSA blls ;g

fu"d"kZ fudyrk gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk ;kfpdk ds dFku dks lkfcr

ugha fd;k x;k gSA foi{khx.k }kjk izkFkhZ ds dk;Z vofèk ds lEcUèk

esa tqykbZ 1996 ls ysdj tqykbZ 2005 rd ds izLrqr fooj.k ls

;g fu"d"kZ fudyrk gS fd izkFkhZ us dk;ZeqfDr fd frfFk fnukad

15-7-2005 ds Bhd iwoZ dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu dk;Z ugha fd;k

gSA ;kph us Loa; fnukad 6-2-2006 ds vkosnu esa viuh dk;Z

vofèk dk tks mijksDr fooj.k izLrqr fd;k gS mlls Hkh lsokeqfDr

dh frfFk ds Bhd iwoZ dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu dk;Z djus dh

iqf"V ugha gksrh gSA lk{; dh mDr O;k[;k ls ;g Hkh fu"d"kZ

fudyrk gS fd ;kph dh fu;qfDr fd izd`fr nSfud osru Hkksxh

FkhA

49-

izkFkhZ ds fo}ku vfèkoDrk dh rjQ ls ;g cgl fd x;h

gS fd foi{k }kjk izkFkhZ dks lsok ls gVkus ds ckn foi{kh us nwljs

vU; O;fDr;ksa dks dke fn;k tcfd izkFkhZ ls dfu"d O;fDr lsok

esa cus jgs] bl izdkj izkFkhZ dks foi{k }kjk volj ugha fn;k x;k]

ftlls èkkjk 25&th ,oa èkkjk 25&,p dk mYya?ku gqvk gSA

fyf[kr cgl ds izLrj 11 esa mDr ckr dgh x;h gS vkSj bl

lEcUèk esa 2005 osLVuZ ykW dslst ¼jktLFkku½] ;w-lh-] i`"B 737]

jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; ¼t;iqj [k.M+ihB½] Mk;jsDVj nwjn’kZu

dsUnz cuke fn tt] dsUnzh; vfèkdj.k ,oa vU; ds n`"VkUr dk

voyEc fy;k x;k gS] blds fo:) foi{kh ds fo}ku vfèkoDrk

6302

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

dh rjQ ls ;g cgl dh x;h gS fd izkFkhZ dks dHkh fu;qfDr ugha

nh x;h vkSj tc dk;Z dh vko’;drk gksrh Fkh rks mls cqyk;k

tkrk Fkk blfy;s izkFkhZ dks fu;qfDr nsus vFkok gVkus dk iz’u

ugha mBrk gSA ;g cgl Hkh fd x;h gS fd izkFkhZ ds ekeys esa

foi{khx.k }kjk èkkjk 25&th ,oa èkkjk 25&,p dk mYya?ku ugha

fd;k x;k rFkk izkFkhZ nSfud osru Hkksxh deZpkjh gS ftls dsoy

dk;Z dh miyCèkrk gksus ij gh j[kk tkrk Fkk vkSj ftrus fnu

dk;Z djrk Fkk mrus fnu dh etnwjh nh tkrh Fkh] blfy;s Hkh

èkkjk 25&th ,oa èkkjk 25&,p dk mYya?ku dk iz’u ugha mBrk

gSA Mk;jsDVj nwjn’kZu dsUnz cuke fn tt] dsUnzh; vfèkdj.k

,oa vU; esa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us ;g voèkkfjr fd;k gS

fd ;fn deZdkj us dsoy 95 fnu dh lsok dh gS rks og èkkjk

25&,Q vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e ds vUrxZr miyCèk ykHk

dk gdnkj ugha gS] ysfdu ;fn deZdkj dh rqyuk esas mlls

dfu"B deZpkjh lsok esa j[kk x;k gS rks ,slh fLFkfr esa ml

deZdkj dh lsok lekfIr dk vkns’k [kf.M+r fd;k tkuk fofèkd

laxr gS ftls dsoy 95 fnu gh lsok dh FkhA ekuuh; mPp

U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh voèkkfjr fd;k gS fd èkkjk 25&th ,o¡ èkkjk

25&,p dh O;oLFkk èkkjk 25&,Q dh O;oLFkk dh rqyuk esa fHkUu

,oa LorU= gS] ftldk rkRi;Z ;g gS fd ,d deZdkj èkkjk

25&,Q ds ykHk dk gdnkj ugha Hkh gS fQj Hkh èkkjk 25&th ,oa

èkkjk 25&,p dk mYya?ku gksus ij mlds vèkhu feyus okys

ykHk dk gdnkj gSA bl ekeysa esa izR;FkhZ deZpkjh 3-7-1987 dks

fu;qDr gqvk Fkk vkSj 31-10-87 rd lsok dh vkSj 1-11-87 dks

fcuk dksbZ dkj.k crk, mldh lsok lekIr dj nh x;h FkhA

fu;kstd }kjk tc IkzR;FkhZ dks gVk;k x;k rks ml le; dfu"B

deZpkjh dk;Zjr Fks vkSj bl ckr dk lk{; Fkk fd gVkus ds ckn

fu;kstd us nSfud etnwjh ij vU; yksxksa dks fu;ksftr fd;kA

mDr fLFkfr esa U;k;kfèkdj.k us izR;FkhZ dh lsok lekfIr dk

vkns’k fujLr fd;k ftlds fo:) ;kfpdk ekuuh; mPp

U;k;ky; }kjk fujLr dh x;hA

50-

izkFkhZ gfj izlkn tks’kh ds ekeys esa ;kfpdk ds izLrj 4

esa dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ dks gVkus ds ckn foi{kh u;k MªkbZoj

j[kdj pkyd dk dke djok jgk gS ftlls èkkjk 25&,p dk

mYya?ku gS] ysfdu ;kfpdk esa u;s pkyd dk uke rFkk mldh

fu;qfDr dh frfFk dk dksbZ mYys[k ugha gS dsoy èkkjk 25&,p

ds mYya?ku dk mYys[k gSA lk{; esa izLrqr 'kiFk&i= esa izkFkhZ

us ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd dey dqekj ;ksxh iq= Jh Jo.k

dqekj ;ksxh dks foi{k us pkyd ds in ij j[k fy;k ysfdu

izkFkhZ dks ugha j[kkA dey dqekj ;ksxh dh fu;qfDr dh frfFk

'kiFk&i= esa vafdr ugha gSA bl lEcUèk esa dksbZ izys[kh; lk{;

;kph dh rjQ ls izLrqr ugha gSA bl lEcUèk esa foi{k }kjk

oknksÙkj esa bUdkj fd;k x;k gSA le>kSrk vfèkdkjh ds le{k

izLrqr izkFkhZ ds vkosnu fnukafdr 6-2-2006 ls ;g tkfgj gS fd

izkFkhZ uoksn; fo|ky; fljksgh esa MªkbZoj ds in ij lk{kkRdkj gsrq

vizSy 98 ds ckn fdlh le; mifLFkr gqvk Fkk ysfdu og

lQy ugha jgkA viuh izfrijh{kk esa dey dqekj ;ksxh dh

fu;qfDr ds lEcUèk esa izkFkhZ us dgk gS fd dey dqekj ;ksxh dh

fu;qfDr ds lEcUèk dksbZ vkns’k i=koyh ij izLrqr ugha fd;k gS

rFkk mls ;g Hkh è;ku ugha gS fd fdl izkpk;Z us dey dqekj

;ksxh dks ukSdjh nh FkhA bl lEcUèk esa izkpk;Z] Jh lqèkhj pUnz

è;kuh ds 'kiFk&i= esa fdlh dh fu;qfDr dk dksbZ mYys[k ugha

gS vkSj izkFkhZ ds lEcUèk esa dgk x;k gS fd mls iw.kZ :Ik ls rnFkZ

vkèkkj ij dk;Z dh miyCèkrk jgus rd nSfud osru Hkksxh ds

:Ik esa fu;fer deZpkjh ds miyCèk gksus rd fu;ksftr fd;k

x;k FkkA izfrijh{kk eas izkpk;Z us dey dqekj ;ksxh ds lEcUèk

esa ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd mUgsa tkudkjh ugha gS dey dqekj

;ksxh dks izkFkhZ dh txg ckn esa j[kk x;k Fkk ;k ughaA izkFkhZ gfj

izlkn tks’kh ds lEcUèk esa izkpk;Z us dgk gS fd t:jr iM+us ij

gfj izlkn tks’kh dks dk;Z gsrq j[kk tkrk Fkk vkSj t:jr lekIr

gksus ij og [kqn gh pyk tkrk FkkA izkpkZ; us ;g Lohdkj fd;k

gS fd orZeku esa pkyd dk dke Bsdsnkj ds ekè;e ls dkUVªsDV

ds }kjk djok;k tkrk gSA mHk;i{k ds mDr lk{; ls izkFkhZ dh

txg fdlh vU; O;fDr dey dqekj ;ksxh dh fu;qfDr dh iq"Vh

ugha gksrhA vr% eS bl fu"d"kZ ij gw¡ fd izkFkhZ dks èkkjk 25&th

vFkok 25&,p ds vUrxZr fdlh izdkj dk ykHk iznku fd;k

tkus fd fofèkd fLFkfr miyCèk ugha gSA

51-

izkFkhZ dh rjQ ls izLrqr 2003 osLVuZ ykW dslst ¼jktLFkku½]

;w-lh- i`"B 523 jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; ¼t;iqj [k.M+ihB½]

tujy eSustj cuke fn yscj dksVZ o vU; esa ekuuh; jktLFkku

mPp U;k;ky; ¼tksèkiqj½ ¼[k.M+ihB½ us ;g ;g voèkkfjr fd;k

gS fd ;fn deZdkj dh lsok lekfIr fofèk ekU; ugha gS rks

deZdkj dh lsok esa iqu% LFkkiuk foxr osru ds lkFk dh tkosxh]

tc rd dh fu;kstd ;g fl) u dj ns fd deZdkj dgha

vU;= ykHk lfgr fu;ksftr FkkA ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us ;g

Hkh voèkkfjr fd;k gS fd dsoy fuokZg ds fy;s deZdkj }kjk dqN

Hkh dk;Z dj ysuk ykHk lfgr fu;kstu ugha ekuk tk ldrkA

52-

2005 ¼4½ i`"B 90] osLVuZ ykW dslst] jktLFkku mPp

U;k;ky; ¼tksèkiqj½] ;wfu;u vkWQ bf.M+;k ,oa vU; cuke Je

U;k;ky; ,oa vU; ds ekeys esa Je U;k;ky; }kjk izR;FkhZ dh

;kfpdk Lohdkj dh x;h vkSj izR;FkhZ dh fofèk fo:) lsok

lekfIr fujLr dh x;h vkSj 50 izfr’kr foxr osru ds lkFk lsok

esa iquLFkkZfir djus dk vkns’k ikfjr fd;k x;kA izR;FkhZ }kjk

lsok lekfIr ds 11 lky ckn fookn mBk;k x;k FkkA Je

U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; ds fo:) ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; ds le{k

;kfpdk izLrqr dh x;h ftlesa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us ;g

voèkkfjr fd;k fd Je U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; esa dksbZ =qfV ;k

voSèkkfudrk ugha gSA ;kfpdk rn~uqlkj fujLr dh x;hA

53-

i{kdkjksa ds vfHkopuksa rFkk mlds leFkZu esa mHk;i{k

}kjk izLrqr lk{; ,oa fofèkd n`"VkUrksa dh mDr O;k[;k ,oa

fo’ys"k.k ds vkèkkj ij eSa bl fu"d"kZ ij gw¡ fd izkFkhZ gfj izlkn

tks’kh us 13-7-1996 fu;qfDr dh dfFkr frfFk vkSj lsoklekfIr dh

frfFk 14-7-2005 ds chp lsoklekfIr ds Bhd iwoZ ,d dSys.Mj

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6303

o"kZ dh vofèk esa 240 fnu dh fujUrj lsok fizfUliy] uoksn;

fo|ky;] xzke&Nku] ftyk&Vksad ds vèkhu ugha dh gS] rFkk

fizfUliy] uoksn; fo|ky; }kjk fnukad 15-7-2005 dks gfj

izlkn tks’kh dh lsok lekfIr oSèk ,o¡ mfpr gS vkSj deZdkj

fdlh vuqrks"k dk gdnkj ugha gSA U;k;fu.kZ;u gsrq izsf"kr funsZ’k

dk mRrj mDr izdkj fn;k tkrk gSA iapkV rn~uqlkj ikfjr

fd;k tkrk gSA

54-

iapkV dh izfrfyfi dsUnzh; ljdkj dks vkS|ksfxd fookn

vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk 17 ¼1½ ds vUrxZr izdk’kukFkZ izsf"kr dh

tk;A

Hkjr ik.Ms;] ihBklhu vfèkdkjh

ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014

dk-vk- 2482-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ Hkkjr

bysDVªkWfuDl fyfeVsM ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds

deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;

ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;&1] paMhx<+ ds

iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 235@2013] 236@2013] 237@2013] 238@2013]

239@2013 vkSj 240@2013) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;

ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&14012@48@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

¹la- ,y&14012@49@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

¹la- ,y&14012@50@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

¹la- ,y&14012@51@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

¹la- ,y&14012@52@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

¹la- ,y&14012@53@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014

S.O. 2482.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D No. 235/

2013, 236/2013,237/2013,238/2013,239/2013 & 240/2013) of

the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour

Court No.1, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in

the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation

to the management of the M/s. Bharat Electronics Limited

and their workmen, which was received by the Central

Government on 08/09/2014.

[No. L-14012/48/2013-IR (DU)]

[No. L-14012/49/2013-IR (DU)]

[No. L-14012/50/2013-IR (DU)]

[No. L-14012/51/2013-IR (DU)]

[No. L-14012/52/2013-IR (DU)]

[No. L-14012/53/2013-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,

PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,

CHANDIGARH.

Case No. ID No.235 of 2013.

Reference No. L-14012/48/2013-IR(DU) dated 03.03.2014

Shri Sanoj Kumar

Son of shri Rajmal,

R/o H.No.536, New Indira Colony,

Manimajra,Chandigarh

.....Workman

Versus

1.

The General Manager,

M/s. Bharat Electronics Limited,

405, Industrial Area,

Phase-III, Panchkula (Haryana)

2.

The Chief Managing Director,

M/s. Bharat Electronics Limited,

Head Office, Outer Ring Road,

Bangalore.

.....Respondents

Appearances :

For the Workman

: None

For the Management

: Sh. N.K. Zakhmi

AWARD PASSED ON : 02.09.2014

Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide

notification No.L-14012/48/2013-IR (DU) dated 3.3.2014 has

referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for

adjudication:

Term of Reference:

“Whether relationship of employer and employee

exists between Sh. Sanoj kumar Son of Shri Rajmal

and Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes,

whether action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd.

Panchkula in terminating the services of Sh.Sanoj

w.e.f. 17.4.2013 is legally just and valid? If not, then

to what relief the workman is entitled to and from

which date?”

2.

Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the

workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per

record three opportunities have been allowed to file claim

statement. None appeared on behalf of the workman despite

notice. It appears that the workman is not interested to

pursue the present reference. In view of the above the

present reference is disposed off for want of prosecution.

3.

Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.

be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the

Central Govt. for publication.

S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer

Chandigarh

02.09.2014

6304

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,

PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,

CHANDIGARH

Case No. ID No. 236 of 2013

Reference No. L-14012/49/2013-IR(DU) dated 03.03.2014

Shri Sunil Kumar

son of Shri Ved Pal,

R/o H.No.10, Rajiv Colony,

Sector-17, Panchkula (Haryana)

.....Workman

Versus

1.

The General Manager,

M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,

405, Industrial Area, Phase-III,

Panchkula (Haryana)

2.

The Chief Managing Director,

M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,

Head Office, Outer Ring Road,

Bangalore.

.....Respondents.

Appearances :

For the Workman

: None.

For the Management

: Sh. N. K. Zakhmi

AWARD PASSED ON:-02.09.2014

Government of India Ministry of Labour vide

notification No.L-14012/49/2013-IR(DU) dated 3.3.2014 has

referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for

adjudication:

Term of Reference:

“Whether relationship of employer and employee

exists between Sh. Sunil Kumar Son of Shri Ved Pal

and Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes,

whether action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd.

Panchkula in terminating the services of Sh.Sunil

Kumar w.e.f. 17.4.2013 is legally just and valid? If

not, then to what relief the workman is entitled to

and from which date?”

2.

Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the

workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per

record three opportunities have been allowed to file claim

statement. None appeared on behalf of the workman despite

notice. It appears that the workman is not interested to

pursue the present reference. In view of the above the

present reference is disposed off for want of prosecution.

3.

Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.

be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the

Central Govt. for publication.

S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer

Chandigarh

02.09.2014

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,

PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,

CHANDIGARH

Case No. ID No.237 of 2013.

Reference No. L-14012/50/2013 (IR(DU)) dated 03.03.2014

Shri Sanjiv

son of Shri Chander,

R/o H.No.97, Rajiv Colony,

Sector-17, Panchkula (Haryana)

....Workman

Versus

1.

The General Manager,

M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,

405, Industrial Area,

Phase-III, Panchkula (Haryana)

2.

The Chief Managing Director,

M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,

Head Office, Outer Ring Road,

Bangalore.

.....Respondents.

Appearances

For the Workman

: None.

For the Management

: Sh. N.K.Zakhmi

AWARD PASSED ON:-02.09.2014

Government of India Ministry of Labour vide

notification No.L-14012/50/2013/IR (DU) dated 3.3.2014 has

referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for

adjudication:

Term of Reference:

“Whether relationship of employer and employee

exists between Sh. Sanjiv Son of Shri Chander and

Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes, whether

action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula in

terminating the services of Sh.Sanjiv w.e.f. 8.4.2013

is legally just and valid? If not, then to what relief

the workman is entitled to and from which date?”

2.

Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the

workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per

record three opportunities have been allowed to file claim

statement. None appeared on behalf of the workman despite

notice. It appears that the workman is not interested to

pursue the present reference. In view of the above the

present reference is disposed off for want of prosecution.

3.

Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.

be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the

Central Govt. for publication.

S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer

Chandigarh

02.09.2014

¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936

6305

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,

PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,

CHANDIGARH

Case No. ID No. 238 of 2013

Reference No. L-14012/51/2013-IR(DU) dated 03.03.2014

Shri Anuj Kumar

son of Shri Babu Ram,

Resident of Village Budhanpur,

Panchkula (Haryana)

.....Workman

Versus

1.

The General Manager,

M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,

405, Industrial Area,

Phase-III, Panchkula (Haryana)

2.

The Chief Managing Director,

M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,

Head Office, Outer Ring Road,

Bangalore.

.....Respondents.

Appearances :

For the Workman

: None

For the Management

: Sh. N.K. Zakhmi

AWARD PASSED ON : 02.09.2014

Government of India Ministry of Labour vide

notification No.L-14012/51/2013-IR (DU) dated 3.3.2014

has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for

adjudication:

Term of Reference:

“Whether relationship of employer and employee

exists between Shri Anuj Kumar son of Shri Babu

Ram and Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes,

whether action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd.

Panchkula in terminating the services of Sh.Anuj

Kumar w.e.f.17.4.2013 is legally just and valid? If

not, then to what relief the workman is entitled to

and from which date?”

2.

Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the

workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per

record three opportunities have been allowed to file claim

statement. None appeared on behalf of the workman despite

notice. It appears that the workman is not interested to

pursue the present reference. In view of the above the

present reference is disposed off for want of prosecution.

3.

Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.

be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the

Central Govt. for publication.

S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer

Chandigarh

02.09.2014

BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,

PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,

CHANDIGARH

Case No. ID No.239 of 2013.

Reference No. L-14012/52/2013-IR(DU) dated 03.03.2014

Shri Sultan Singh

son of Shri Rajmal,

Resident of House No. 1103/1,

Rajiv Colony, Sector-17,

Panchkula (Haryana)

.....Workman

Versus

1.

The General Manager,

M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,

405, Industrial Area, Phase-III,

Panchkula (Haryana)

2.

The Chief Managing Director,

M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,

Head Office, Outer Ring Road,

Bangalore.

.....Respondents

Appearances

For the Workman

: None.

For the Management

: Sh. N.K.Zakhmi

AWARD PASSED ON:-02.09.2014

Government of India Ministry of Labour vide

notification No.L-14012/52/2013-IR (DU) dated 3.3.2014 has

referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for

adjudication:

Term of Reference:

“Whether relationship of employer and employee

exists between Shri Sultan Singh son of shri Rajmal

and Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes,

whether action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd.

Panchkula in terminating the services of Sh.Sultan

Singh w.e.f.13.3.2013 is legally just and valid? If

not, then to what relief the workman is entitled to

and from which date?”

2.

Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the

workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per

record three opportunities have been allowed to file claim

statement. None appeared on behalf of the workman despite

notice. It appears that the workman is not interested to

pursue the present reference. In view of the above the

present reference is disposed off for want of prosecution.

3.

Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.

be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the

Central Govt. for publication.

S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer

Chandigarh

02.09.2014

6306

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,

PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,

CHANDIGARH

Case No. ID No. 240 of 2013

Reference No. L-14012/53/2013-IR(DU) dated 03.03.2014

Shri Satyavan

son of Shri Rajmal,

Resident of House No. 1104,

Rajiv Colony, Sector-17,

Panchkula (Haryana)

.....Workman

Versus

1.

The General Manager,

M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,

405, Industrial Area,

Phase-III, Panchkula (Haryana)

2.

The Chief Managing Director,

M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,

Head Office, Outer Ring Road,

Bangalore.

.....Respondents

Appearances :

For the Workman

: None.

For the Management

: Sh. N.K. Zakhmi

AWARD PASSED ON : 02.09.2014

Government of India Ministry of Labour vide

notification No.L-14012/53/2013-IR (DU) dated 3.3.2014 has

referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for

adjudication:

Term of Reference:

“Whether relationship of employer and employee

exists between Shri Satyavan son of Shri Rajmal and

Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes, whether

action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula in

terminating the services of Sh. Satyavan

w.e.f.1.4.2013 is legally just and valid? If not, then

to what relief the workman is entitled to and from

which date?”

2.

Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the

workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per

record already three opportunities have been allowed to

file claim statement. None appeared on behalf of the

workman despite notice. It appears that the workman is

not interested to pursue the present reference. In view of

the above the present reference is disposed off for want

of prosecution.

3.

Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.

be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the

Central Govt. for publication.

S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer

Chandigarh

02.09.2014

Printed by the Manager, Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064

and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.